part 1 of the african peace facility evaluation - European ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and insufficient staffing. Struggling to grasp the minutiae of EU administration and procedures is a burden that some RECs (ECCAS is one example) find almost overwhelming. The structural deficiencies of AU/RECs on financial management have made matters worse, although the AU appears to have made significant progress in this area during 2010. II.2 FUNDING OF THE APF INSTRUMENT The first APF was created with a €250 million budget. The NIP ‘slicing’ mechanism was confirmed in DECISION No 3/2003 OF THE ACP-EC COUNCIL OF MINISTERS of 11 December 2003 on the use of resources from the long-term development envelope of the 9th EDF for the creation of a Peace Facility for Africa: “Art 1 Para 1: A contribution of 1,5 % shall be taken from allocations that were notified to African ACP States in accordance with Article 1(b) of Annex IV to the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement. Such contribution will be taken from the uncommitted balance of the allocation referred to in Article 3(2) (b) of Annex IV to the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, the so-called B-allocation. If the uncommitted balance of the B-allocation is insufficient, the remainder will be taken from the uncommitted balance of the allocation referred to in Article 3(2) (a) of Annex IV, the so-called A-allocation. A total amount of EUR 126,4 million shall thus be transferred from the respective country allocations to the intra-ACP allocation under the envelope for regional cooperation and integration and used for the creation of a Peace Facility for Africa.” The slicing mechanism was not pursued in the second APF in 2007, under 10 th EDF. As a result, without slicing mechanism, the accountability between the AU MS and the AUC may have weakened. For many interlocutors, the NIP slicing mechanism offered several excellent aspects, among which building political commitment to the AU was perhaps the most important. Therefore, the evaluation sees a possible re-introduction of the NIP ‘slicing’ mechanism in the future as a valuable way not only to increase funding for the 2nd APF, but also strengthen mutual links and commitments between the AU as an institution and AU Member States. Taking into account that the second APF, under the 10th EDF, budgeted €300 million (for PSOs €200m, for APSA €65m, for ERM €15m, audit M&E etc. €7m, contingencies €13m), since the establishment of the African Peace Facility (APF) in 2004, the EU has channelled €740 million through this instrument. 15 In 2007, the AU and the EU decided to broaden the scope of the African Peace Facility to cover conflict prevention and post-conflict stabilisation as well as to accelerate decisionmaking and coordination processes. In line with the priorities of the Partnership on Peace and Security of the Joint Africa-EU Strategy, APF funds have been allocated as follows: Item in the APF budget 16 Amount and purpose under 9 th and 10 th EDF 1) Capacity Building (CB) € 100 million have been allocated to the Operationalisation of African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) and Africa- EU dialogue. EU support aims at strengthening dialogue and the capacity and effectiveness of the various components of the APSA. 15 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/regional-cooperation/peace/index_en.htm 16 Additional funds are allocated to activities such as audit, monitoring, visibility, evaluation and technical assistance. Page 10 of 49
Item in the APF budget 16 Amount and purpose under 9 th and 10 th EDF 2) Peace Support Operations (PSO) € 600 million have been earmarked for this purpose. The funding of Peace Support Operations represents the core activity of the African Peace Facility (APF). EU support aims at providing sustainable and predictable funding to enable effective planning. 3) Early Response Mechanism (ERM): € 15 million have been allocated to finance preparatory stages of Peace Support Operations or urgent funding for initial mediation processes (6 months). 4) Contingencies: € 40 million are earmarked for unforeseen needs in case any of the above-mentioned budget lines is depleted. APF contracted amounts under the 9 th EDF (1 st APF) 17 1st APF PSOs AMIS Sudan >€350m FOMUC/MICOPAX CAR €53.2m AMISOM Somalia €35.5m AMISEC + MAES Comoros € 5m + €3m PSO cumulated expenditure AMIS TOTAL AMIS + others 2004 79.17 81 2005 149.17 160 2006 229.17 250 2007 306.60 350 2008 306.60 400 Capacity Building EXPENDITURE AUC capacities €6m ASF workshops €988 552 REC liaison, EWS & finance mgt €7.7m (South Africa budget line) ASF planning, EWS & finance mgt €20m II.3 APSA AND THE APF INTERVENTION LOGIC In December 2005, the EU adopted its Africa Strategy, aiming to “support Africa’s efforts to reach the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and make Europe's partnership with Africa more efficient”. 18 EU financial support to achieving the MDGs and to the APF is channelled through the intergovernmental European Development Fund (EDF), which, as a formal EU mechanism under EU’s first pillar, is managed by the European Commission. The APF is therefore a ‘development’ funding directed towards creating the necessary security conditions for development in line with the spirit and legal basis of the Cotonou Agreement. The African Union and its African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) were born with the new Millennium. The following diagram displays the pillars of the African Peace and Security Architecture 17 From the APF unit http://www.docstoc.com/docs/49327320/African-Peace-Facility 18 http://ec.europa.eu/development/Geographical/europe-cares/africa/eu_strategy_en.html Page 11 of 49
Page 1 and 2: THE EUROPEAN UNION’S EDF PROGRAMM
Page 3 and 4: Contents Executive Summary.........
Page 5 and 6: EASBRIG East African Standby Brigad
Page 7 and 8: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EU foreign policy
Page 9 and 10: The principle of subsidiarity shoul
Page 11 and 12: econstruction, relevant capacities
Page 13 and 14: ‣ Areas for further study and que
Page 15: II. GENERAL APPRAISAL OF THE APF II
Page 19 and 20: AU, the relative limited focus on t
Page 21 and 22: European Parliament and NGOs contin
Page 23 and 24: It is argued by the military bias s
Page 25 and 26: III. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATI
Page 27 and 28: 3) “Political appropriateness”
Page 29 and 30: ‣ EEAS, because APF finances peac
Page 31 and 32: The need to respond quickly to peac
Page 33 and 34: APF MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING In 20
Page 35 and 36: Second, the main APF programmes (on
Page 37 and 38: aiming at allowing a fast and effec
Page 39 and 40: mechanism, EDF has its own decision
Page 41 and 42: The costs covered by ATHENA include
Page 43 and 44: RECs that might not qualify or for
Page 45 and 46: IV. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIO
Page 47 and 48: At first sight, the Instrument for
Page 49 and 50: In the short term, this evaluation
Page 51 and 52: The evaluation recommends earmarks
Page 53 and 54: Lack of Synergy between RECs and th
Page 55: IV.4.4 AFRICAN P&S FUNDING POLICIES

part 1 of the african peace facility evaluation - European ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?