52013DC0563

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2012 Annual Report on the Instrument for Stability

1........... Introduction.................................................................................................................... 3

2........... Structure of the Instrument for Stability (IfS).................................................................... 3

3........... Implementation of the IfS................................................................................................ 4

4........... Overview of the IfS for the period 2007-2012................................................................ 5

5........... State of play of the IfS in 2012........................................................................................ 6

6........... Response to situations of crisis or emerging crisis (IfS Article 3)....................................... 7

6.1........ How the IfS has responded to crises in 2012................................................................... 7

6.2........ Who is involved in IfS crisis response actions?............................................................... 10

7........... Assistance in the context of stable conditions for cooperation (IfS Article 4)................... 10

7.1........ Threats to security and safety (IfS Article 4.1)............................................................... 11

7.2........ Risk mitigation linked to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) materials (IfS Article 4.2)     12

7.3........ Pre- and post- crisis capacity-building (IfS Article 4.3).................................................. 13

8........... Conclusion................................................................................................................... 17

1.           Introduction

Following the sixth year of the Instrument for Stability, this Annual Report is submitted to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, in compliance with the reporting requirement set out in Article 23 of Regulation (EC) N°1717/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an Instrument for Stability.[1]

The Instrument for Stability (IfS) is an important tool placed under the authority of the High Representative/Vice President, enabling her to target resources in support of comprehensive EU approaches aimed at preventing, mitigating and dealing with the aftermath of crises and security threats around the world. The report gives an overview of how the IfS was mobilised in 2012.

This report is complemented by two Commission Staff Working Documents which provide comprehensive and detailed global implementation updates on: (i) urgent IfS crisis response measures that were launched and/or ongoing in 2012, falling under Article 3 of the Regulation; and (ii) longer-term IfS programmes that fall under Articles 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 of the Regulation.

The IfS actions described in this report are undertaken by a wide range of implementing bodies, including agencies of the United Nations, other international and regional bodies, EU Member State bodies, NGOs and other civil society organisations.

2.           Structure of the Instrument for Stability (IfS)

The IfS is one of the key external assistance instruments that enables the EU to take a lead in helping to prevent and respond to actual or emerging crises around the world.

As summarised below, Articles 3 and 4 of the IfS Regulation set out the types of activities for which this instrument can be mobilised.

Article 3 foresees ‘assistance in response to crisis or emerging crisis’. This can include responding to serious political and conflict situations, major natural disasters[2] and sometimes a complex combination of both scenarios. Where windows of opportunity emerge for the prevention, mitigation or resolution of crises, such IfS assistance, which is limited to instances when the mainstream external assistance instruments[3] cannot be mobilised in a sufficiently timely or appropriate manner, takes the form of immediate Exceptional Assistance Measures.[4] These response measures are in some cases followed up by further Interim Response Programmes.[5]

IfS measures can often complement EU humanitarian assistance, as well as contribute to the ‘Linking Relief, Reconstruction, and Development’[6] approach. In addition, IfS actions can complement EU CSDP[7] operations and other actions, and also make further critical contributions to an EU comprehensive approach in response to conflicts and crises.

IfS responses complement the mainstream assistance instruments which, due to their scope, strategic planning and programming cycles, are often not suited to react in cases of crisis or emerging crisis. Indeed, an important asset of the EU external action toolbox is the fact that it includes such a wide range of instruments, enabling the Union to provide tailored responses to suit different situations.

Article 4 of the IfS Regulation foresees a programmable component of the Instrument which encompasses longer-term IfS programmes addressing three focal areas:

· Security and safety threats in a trans-regional context (Article 4.1);

· Risk mitigation linked to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) materials (Article 4.2); and

· Pre- and post-crisis capacity building (Article 4.3).[8]

3.           Implementation of the Instrument for Stability

The Commission's Service for Foreign Policy Instruments (FPI) works in very close collaboration with the European External Action Service (EEAS), a functionally autonomous body of the European Union that also came into being in January 2011[9]. Both services report to High Representative/Vice President Ashton, with the FPI coming under her responsibilities as Vice President of the European Commission.

Article 9 of the Decision creating the EEAS specifies that the management of the Union’s external cooperation remains under the responsibility of the Commission, with the High Representative ensuring overall political coordination of external assistance instruments, including the IfS. Thus, the EEAS provides the political steer for Article 3 of the Instrument for Stability and works jointly on the preparation of measures with the FPI which is responsible for the implementation of agreed actions. The EEAS also provides the strategic programming for Article 4 through the Strategy Papers and Multi-annual Indicative Programmes. The corresponding Annual Action Programmes (AAP) are defined and executed by DG DEVCO[10] (for Art. 4.1 & 4.2) and FPI (for Art. 4.3).

Cooperation between the Commission and the EEAS is kept under constant review to maximise synergies and complementarities and to further improve the implementation modalities of the IfS.

4.           Overview of the IfS for the period 2007-2012

After six years in existence, the IfS is firmly established as an EU instrument that provides a necessary adjoint in the EU comprehensive approach to addressing the full cycle of conflict and crisis prevention, response and recovery around the world, addressing security threats at national and regional levels and building capacities to prevent conflict and respond to crises.

Over the period 2007 - 2012, the short-term crisis response component of the IfS has made available EUR 872 million for some 243 actions responding to crises spanning some 70 countries or regions worldwide. The geographic coverage for the period 2007-2012 is shown in Figure 1.

Over the same period, some EUR 403.8 million was made available for the long-term, programmable element of the IfS, covering actions spanning Art. 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3. Figure 2 illustrates how funding was distributed amongst crisis response measures (Art. 3) and the longer-term programmes (Art. 4) in this period.

5.           State of play of the IfS in 2012

Of the EUR 286.1 million budget available and fully committed for the IfS in 2012[11] the breakdown of allocations was:

· EUR 195.8 million for crisis or emerging crisis situations (Art 3);

· EUR 22 million for responses to trans-regional threats (Art 4.1);

· EUR 46.3 million for CBRN risk mitigation (Art 4.2); and

· EUR 22 million for pre- and post- crisis capacity building (Art 4.3).

Through regular notes presented to the Political and Security Committee, the Council is kept informed on the planning of new Art. 3 crisis response measures and also updated on the implementation of ongoing measures. The Working Group on Conflict, Security and Development of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament, which was established in the framework of the democratic scrutiny of the IfS, convened three meetings with representatives from Commission services and the EEAS.

In terms of geographic distribution, Figure 3 below reflects the significant on-going IfS support to the crises across the Middle East and North and Sub-Saharan Africa in 2012.

Specific examples of IfS projects in 2012 are given in the two sections that follow.

6.           Responses to situations of crisis or emerging crisis (IfS Article 3)

6.1.        How the IfS has responded to crises in 2012

During 2012, the EU addressed several major crises, including the Arab Spring upheavals across North Africa and the Middle East which, in turn, also directly impacted on stability in the Sahel region. The EU also responded to crises in other parts of the world, all of which required effective and timely interventions in situations of fragility and/or post-crisis. These actions sought to help stabilise countries and enhance resilience.

Full details of all IfS measures under implementation in 2012 are set out in the Commission Staff Working Document I which accompanies this Annual Report. Illustrative of activities in 2012, the following actions demonstrate the wide scope and the many different types of crises the IfS was called upon to respond to in various locations around the world:

· In spring 2012, there was an intense diplomatic effort to prevent an escalation of violence in Syria and the rapid deployment of the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) was a strategic priority for the EU. IfS funding helped UNSMIS to start operating quickly and safely, for example, by ensuring that 25 armoured cars were immediately dispatched to Damascus. After the UNSMIS mandate ended, some of these vehicles remained at the disposition of the UN-Arab League Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi and his team. The IfS support also helped bring together members of the opposition in two events in Brussels and Cairo so as to help them forge a more unified position. In the second half of the year, the number of those who left their homes increased and a second IfS support programme started to provide assistance to the authorities and communities in neighbouring countries that host refugees. Support is also provided to those who have remained in Syria.

· Support was also given to Libya to provide assistance in developing national capacity to respond to crisis situations, towards the protection of vulnerable groups and in the clearance of unexploded ordnance. Furthermore, assistance was provided to a needs assessment in integrated border management, paving the way for a subsequent (CSDP) exploratory mission. This action in particular will not only benefit Libya but the entire Sahel region, helping to reduce the trafficking of human beings and illegal weapons.

· Elections are often key elements on the path to recovery from crises and in 2012 IfS election support was an evident theme in conflict prone areas across various regions. Projects were launched in Guinea Bissau, Togo, Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, Madagascar, Kenya, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Haiti. Crucially, these election support measures mainly provide assistance outside the realm of already foreseen election cycles. Such conflict prevention measures also pave the way for complementarity with wider EU strategies and other instruments.

· In early 2012, the EU was requested to back UN efforts to address escalating tensions between the Iraqi government and the residents of Camp Ashraf, many of whom have links with the People’s Mujahedin of Iran. The quick mobilisation of IfS funds allowed for the implementation of a compromise solution. At the end of 2012, many of the former residents of Camp Ashraf had relocated to a new facility and started proceedings for permanent relocation outside Iraq. While tension persists, the IfS funding has helped facilitate the Iraqi government, the former residents of Camp Ashraf and the international community in making progress towards a permanent solution.

· Despite setbacks, the transition in Yemen advanced in 2012 and, through the IfS, the EU together with the United Nations and the World Bank, helped Yemeni policy makers define the needs of the country following the recent conflict. Reforms to the civilian security sector are a priority that the Yemeni transitional government has identified so as to ensure that the security services genuinely respond to the security needs of the public. IfS support helped to plan and design the Yemeni reform plans.

· In the Sahel, the IfS has taken a regional approach in tackling the prevailing security challenges. A measure to mitigate the impact of the Libyan crisis in the northern regions of Niger and Mali was agreed in early 2012. Following the military coup in Mali on 22 March 2012, the support was increased and extended to other areas in Niger affected by the crisis in Mali. Moreover, demining programmes were put in place in Chad and in Libya which aim at contributing to the stabilisation of the region and ensure access of the security forces to areas contaminated by mines which often constitute a safe haven for illegal trafficking and for terrorists. All these interventions are fully in line with the EU’s comprehensive ‘Strategy for Security and Development in the Sahel’ and complement other ongoing efforts in the region under different EU instruments, including actions under the CSDP.

· In sub-Saharan Africa, the IfS provided support to stabilisation and early recovery pilot projects in Somalia, as well as supporting the demobilisation of forces in the Central African Republic (CAR). In CAR, support was provided towards the socio-economic reintegration of 5,000 demobilised soldiers from the national armed forces as well as to the demining and clearance of unexploded ordnance in the north and east of the country (though this had to be suspended following subsequent events).

· Peace-building efforts in Nigeria and Burundi involved consolidating support for strengthening the architecture for peace and conflict resolution and fighting youth unemployment in the Plateau State of Nigeria. Contributing to peace-building and conflict prevention in Nigeria is particularly important as the security environment in Plateau State also poses a fertile ground for extremist groups such as Boko Haram to extend their activities in the region. IfS support also contributed towards wider efforts to maintain peace in Burundi.

· In April 2012, the IfS provided broad support to the Myanmar/Burma reform process, including technical assistance and advisory support to Government ministries. Further assistance was given to set up the Myanmar Peace Centre (MPC) in October, coordinating the peace negotiation teams and serving as an open platform for dialogue between the various stakeholders. It also ensures the broader national and international public remain informed and engaged in the peace process, as well as the ongoing coordination of support provided by local and international actors. This initial assistance paved the way for a comprehensive IfS support programme to the Myanmar/Burma peace process into 2013, including structural and operational support to the MPC. An additional IfS action to alleviate the threat of mines will assist in the return of internally displaced persons and refugees, as well as provide pre-requisite conditions towards socio-economic development in several ethnic areas in Myanmar/Burma.

· In the Philippines, the IfS has been part of the extensive EU involvement in the peace process in Mindanao since 2010. Invited by the Philippines Government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), the EU was asked to take on a central role both in assisting the negotiating parties and the facilitator in the peace negotiations, as well as to monitor compliance with already brokered agreements. In mid-2012, the EU renewed its commitments to the peace process in the form of an IfS follow-up action. This allowed for continued support to the mediating/monitoring structures but was also sufficiently flexible to allow follow-up actions when an agreement was reached. Currently the full consequences of the landmark peace deal reached in October 2012 are being assessed and the IfS assistance might be partially re-directed towards further peace consolidating activities. Due to its success, the mediation and monitoring set-up in the Philippines is now considered an effective model that can be applied in other conflicts, notably in the region. The IfS is funding actions where key players from the Philippines inform, for example, counterparts in Myanmar/Burma.

· In the Americas, the announcement of peace negotiations for Colombia in August 2012 renewed hopes that the more than half a century long conflict may be brought to an end. Key to any peace deal will be the capacity of the Colombian authorities to address the grievances of those who have been the victims of abuses and, in particular, the many who have lost their land. A new IfS measure started in October 2012, at the same time as the peace talks began in Havana, and will assist Colombian institutions to implement recent legislation to protect victims’ rights (Law 1448) more effectively. Other measures in the region included support to address root causes of conflict in Bolivia and border disputes between Guatemala and Belize.

· IfS interim response programmes building on earlier exceptional assistance measures received the positive opinion of EU Member States in the IfS Committee so as to continue the assistance on disaster preparedness in Haiti, the support to a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, the stabilisation of Georgia's breakaway regions and the support to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.

6.2.        Who is involved in IfS crisis response actions?

IfS crisis response measures are prepared in close cooperation with a variety of partners: EU institutions; EU Member States; civil society; public administrations; third countries and others. EU Delegations play a key role, providing early warning and developing initial concepts and options for responses. In 2012, the majority of new measures continued to be ‘sub-delegated’[12]for local implementation to EU Delegations, whose understanding of local needs and requirements is essential to the success of the activities. This enables contracts to be negotiated with implementing bodies in a timely fashion and the implementation of these often sensitive projects to be monitored at close proximity. As a result, EU Delegations were responsible for 62% of commitments and 80% of payments under the IfS in 2012.

Figure 4 below illustrates the range of IfS implementing partners for Art. 3 crisis response measures from 2007 to 2012. 47% of the IfS budget was implemented by non-state actors, of which 23% was through NGOs. Naturally, the UN family remained a significant implementing partner given their expertise and strong in-country presence which enabled them to react quickly, using their solid local networks, in the volatile environments where IfS crisis response actions operate.

7.           Assistance in the context of stable conditions for cooperation (IfS Article 4)

The Commission ensures the preparation of annual programming and the management of assistance under Article 4 in the context of stable conditions for cooperation. The 2012 IfS Annual Action Programmes were adopted as follows: Article 4.1 (security and other threats related to law and order) in September 2012; Article 4.2 (Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear material risk mitigation) in August 2012; and Article 4.3 (Pre-crisis and Post-crisis capacity building) in March 2012. A detailed implementation update on activities under each of Art 4.1, Art. 4.2 and Art. 4.3 is provided in the Commission Staff Working Document II accompanying this Annual Report.

7.1.        Threats to security and safety (IfS Article 4.1)

The programmes devised in the context of trans-regional threats focus on capacity building, in close consultation with beneficiary countries. Typically, security capacities are strengthened at the national and regional levels, with a view to enable effective global and trans-regional cooperation. Under a tailored approach, key countries in a region are identified and the capacities of local law enforcement and security units strengthened by setting up or further developing specialised units and inter-agency cooperation. Regional coordination functions are then established, making use of existing structures whenever possible, to foster regional and trans-regional cooperation. Information sharing is promoted through regional information systems. Different domains are covered: tackling trafficking, money laundering and other forms of organised crime along the cocaine and heroin routes; illicit trafficking of firearms and explosive materials; enhancing maritime security and safety along the critical maritime routes; and capacity building in regions afflicted by terrorism.

In 2012, EUR 22 million was committed to actions in the above areas, with a total of around EUR 14.2 million in payments. By the end of 2012, and through the ESF,[13] more than 100 experts were recruited from specialist public or semi-public organisations in the EU Member States, joining forces to make their specific knowledge and expertise available and providing technical inputs to the identification and detailed planning of IfS actions. This included the 2013 Annual Action Programme (AAP), as well as paving the way for a fully-fledged implementation of actions decided in previous AAPs. The following highlights the areas covered:

· At the end of 2012, in the framework of the Cocaine Route Programme, the project AIRCOP set up three Joint Airport Interdiction Task Forces in Cape Verde, Senegal and Togo supporting the fight against organised crime on the cocaine route. A new project was also launched for the setting-up of a regional police information system in West Africa (WAPIS I, EUR 2.2 million in 2012) and another contract confirmed the on-going EU commitment to the prevention of the diversion of drug precursors in Latin America and the Caribbean (PRELAC II, EUR 3 million in 2012). A contract for an anti-Money Laundering project in West Africa was also signed, focusing on the non-banking financial and designated non-financial businesses and professions in Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal and Cape Verde (EUR 1.8 million in 2012).

· Support to the fight against organised crime on the heroin route continued, with work across ten countries, including Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan;

· The EUR 16.5 million Critical Maritime Routes programme (EUR 2 million in 2012) covers 17 coastal countries of the West Indian Ocean, South East Asia and the Gulf of Guinea. It enhances the information sharing capacities and maritime law enforcement functions of coastal states so as to help achieve safer maritime traffic by focusing on piracy and armed robbery at sea;

· Several projects are aimed at preventing and combating terrorism, contributing to global counter-terrorism efforts, including implementation of United Nations strategy. In 2012, implementation of the project 'Contre Terrorism Sahel' continued with a number of capacity-building interventions targeting Niger and Mauritania, as well as efforts aiming at strengthening regional cooperation in this area. A study on the Nigeria based Boko Haram group was launched. Collaboration with Pakistan aims to improve the Punjab criminal justice system and in South-East Asia, the IfS is engaged in a EUR 2 million joint EU-UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime) anti-terrorism initiative;

· Cybercrime is a relatively new manifestation of existing global and trans-regional threats, which can no longer be effectively tackled without addressing their cyber dimension. Formulation of a EUR 3 million project with the Council of Europe to promote accession to and implementation of the so-called BUDAPEST Convention and related capacity development of law enforcement and judiciary authorities in target countries commenced in 2012. Considering that most critical infrastructure operation systems are network-connected, the potential destabilising effects of a cyber attack or a major accidental failure of key information and communications technologies networks could be devastating. It is against this background that cyber security will be addressed under the IfS (EUR 1.5 million earmarked for trans-regional cooperation, as well as on the implementation of international standards in the fields of: risk awareness; vulnerability analysis; emergency preparedness; and alert and consequence management);

· Falsified medicines are a major threat to public health and safety as they usually contain ingredients which are of bad quality, in the wrong dose or simply ineffective - and in some cases - even toxic. Although the scope of the menace is global, developing countries are particularly exposed to this threat. EUR 4.2 million was earmarked to strengthen the legal framework, mainly through the MEDICRIME Convention, as well as capacities to detect and analyse suspicious medicines and finally, police investigation and criminal justice capacity to disrupt and dismantle the globalised criminal networks;

· In order to fight the illicit accumulation and trafficking in small arms and light weapons (SALW) and support coordination and implementation of international and regional SALW instruments, new projects were signed with the Regional Centre for Small Arms (RECSA, EUR 2.7 million), Security Commission of the Central American Integration System (SICA, EUR 2.3 million) and INTERPOL (EUR 1.5 million for iARMS). These actions are complementarity to on-going work on SALW supported by the Instrument for Stability in Sub-Saharan Africa and South America.

7.2.        Risk mitigation linked to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) materials (IfS Article 4.2)

Historically, activities in most fields were concentrated on the former Soviet Union. In 2010, efforts were made to enlarge the geographical coverage of programme activities. Coverage has been extended to the Mediterranean Basin, the Middle East, the Gulf, South-East Asia, Central Asia, South Caucasus and Africa. There are more than 60 countries involved, in addition to those of the former Soviet Union.

The CBRN programme covers risks related to accidental, natural or malevolent CBRN related issues and aims at improving the safety and security culture by spreading best practices and raising the general level of security and safety awareness. Prior to 2010, different domains were covered separately.[14] From 2010 onwards, the CBRN ‘Centres of Excellence’, set up worldwide by the EU under the IfS, are gradually providing a single and integrated platform for actions in all of the domains of border monitoring/illicit trafficking, export control, bio safety, bio security, etc., including civil protection measures (emergency planning, crisis preparedness and response. These Centres of Excellence (CoE) seek to enhance CBRN risk mitigation policies by developing tailored assistance packages (13 actions for EUR 19 million). They will constitute a major tool for capacity building and developing coherent regional policies and for strengthening the cooperation of national and regional capabilities in this domain. In 2012, the EU established CoE in South-East Asia (Philippines), South East Europe/Southern Caucasus/Ukraine (Georgia), North Africa (Algeria), the "Atlantic façade" (Morocco), the Middle East (Jordan) and Eastern and Central Africa (Kenya). The first five local CoE Regional Secretariats became operative in late 2011 and early 2012. Furthermore, contacts have been established with Central Asia and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.

Other supported areas include:

· Assistance and cooperation in export control of dual-use goods activities which resulted in successful programme implementations with more than 28 states around the world. Cooperation with the US EXBS[15] Export Control system has been reinforced. Extension and reinforcement of these activities in the Middle East is foreseen for the second half of 2013.

· Support for retraining and alternative employment of former weapon scientists and engineers with origin in countries of the former Soviet Union has continued through the dedicated Science and Technology Centre (STCU) and International Science and Technology Centre (ISTC).

· The fight against illicit trafficking of CBRN materials and deceptive financial practices is on-going with actions in Central Asia and South East Asia and North Africa. A contract has been signed with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to contribute to a new Nuclear Material Laboratory to be used by IAEA Safeguards Analytical Services in Seibersdorf, Austria (EUR 5 million in 2012).

7.3.        Pre- and post- crisis capacity-building (IfS Article 4.3)

With the adoption of the Annual Action Programme (AAP) for the IfS Pre- and Post- Crisis Capacity Building component in March 2012,[16] several key elements of the new 2012-2013 Strategy Paper were translated into concrete actions. The six actions included in the 2012 AAP, are grouped in four thematic areas.[17] They build on previous work and foresee the involvement of civil society organisations, regional and international organisations and Member States as implementing partners. They also serve to give practical effect to Council Conclusions on conflict prevention.[18] These are notably with regard to developing conflict prevention tools and approaches, focusing on early warning, conflict risk analysis, mediation and cross-cutting issues such as gender and human rights in all areas of short and long-term external action.

2012 saw the development of some 60 projects, comprised of both on-going and newly-launched activities, to build capacity for crisis preparedness and peacebuilding in pre- and post-conflict scenarios. The following section illustrates some of the results of the Peace-building Partnership in 2012, while full details can be found in the Commission Staff Working Document II:

· Dialogue with civil society: The Civil Society Dialogue Network[19] (CSDN), provides a valuable forum of dialogue on peace-building issues between EU policy-makers and non-state actors. In 2012, eleven meetings were held on various thematic and country specific topics (including Syria, Libya and Mali) to provide input to the EU’s policy-making processes. Since 2010, this action has also produced some 50 items in the form of reports, background documents, flash recommendations/key points documents, literature reviews and training material for the benefit of civil society stakeholders and policy makers. Its success has also resulted in a spin-off project financed by the Europe for Citizens Programme[20] of the European Union and a CSDN Phase II under the 2013 AAP will ensure further valuable continuity.

· Capacity building of in-country Non-State Actors (NSA): EUR 8.5 million of support was agreed, with ensuing projects managed by the EU Delegations to Brazil, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Haiti, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India and Kyrgyzstan. These projects create capacities for civil society actors at local level in a wide variety of peace-building themes: women, peace and security; children, youth, peace and security; mediation, dialogue and transitional justice; and climate change, natural resources and conflict. This continues similar support provided under previous AAPs which have already funded NSA projects in 14 countries so far.[21]

· Mediation and Dialogue: Cooperation with UNDP's Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery (BCPR) on the establishment of sustainable national mechanisms for internal mediation and conflict management has begun to yield tangible results.[22] Government stakeholders alongside political parties and civil society in Bolivia, Chad, the Maldives, Nepal, Ghana, Guyana and Mauritania received training to engage in facilitation and mediation activities, as well as to provide further cascade training to their national counterparts in these areas. The EU also supported the establishment of three positions within the Standby Team of Mediation Experts, set up under the UN Department of Political Affairs (DPA) Mediation Support Unit (MSU). Deployable anywhere in the world at 72-hours' notice, in 2012 they provided expertise to mediation efforts led by the UN and UN Member States and by other international, regional and sub-regional organisations in a number of locations including Kenya, Algeria, Iraq, Central African Republic, Togo, Lebanon, Gabon and Fiji. The MSU also identified 12 senior mediators from the Mediation Roster to be appointed and trained in 2013 as lead mediators for UN processes.

· Peace-building and Human Rights, focusing on Youth and Women: In Kosovo[23], the IfS continued promoting sustainable peace by encouraging young people to increase their civil society activism and enhance their political participation. In 2012, youth-led activities on conflict prevention under the Kosovo Conflict Prevention Group focused on civil society financing at community level, social action and youth participation in policy making, particularly in mixed community areas. Over 17 civil society organisations benefited from the 21 customised training sessions delivered on conflict prevention, advocacy skills, and fundraising methodology.

The first EU/UN Women/UNDP Partnership programme on women's participation in peacebuilding and post-conflict activities was launched in February 2012. The programme comprised numerous initiatives, including: an Open Day on women’s access to justice in Liberia, in the presence of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General; the development of an online campaign in Kosovo for the 16 Days of Activism Against Violence Against Women and the launching of a micro-grants scheme for local civil society; and the organisation of an Open Day in Timor Leste with a focus on women’s economic empowerment.

· Early Warning and conflict prevention: In cooperation with the EU Joint Research Centre (JRC) and in the framework of the EU-Africa Strategy, the IfS continued technical and scientific support to the African Union's (AU) Continental Early-Warning System (CEWS), supplying reliable and up-to-date information on potential, actual and post-conflict situations. Moreover, three actions implemented respectively by the International Crisis Group (ICG), International Alert and Saferworld/Conciliation Resources drew on expert-led analysis including national political elites, locally-based analysis and perspectives of the communities affected by conflict, thereby creating greater access to field-based conflict prevention and resolution approaches for EU stakeholders. Cooperation with Kvinna til Kvinna Foundation also provided field-based analysis on women’s role in peace processes and peace negotiations as envisaged in UNSCR 1325, results of which were presented at a specific Conference in the European Parliament in October, identifying opportunities for a greater role for women in conflict prevention and peace building.

· Natural Resources and Conflict: in 2012 the EU-UN Partnership on land, natural resources and conflict published the 'Toolkit and Guidance for preventing and managing land, natural resources and conflict', as well as a new research and training manual on the role of economic policy and conflict prevention in resource-rich countries. Presented during the sixty-seventh session of the UN General Assembly, the Toolkit[24] served as inspiration for a draft General Assembly resolution on “promoting transparency throughout the value chain of natural resources to boost inclusive and sustainable growth”. In addition, the Partnership delivered specific training sessions on land and natural resources at a number of international events. Multi-disciplinary expertise was deployed in Afghanistan to help the government with regard to natural resources and land management related programming for 2013.

· Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration: In the context of support to the UN Inter Agency Working Group on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (IAWG-DDR), IfS support enabled the delivery of several DDR trainings for UN staff and UN partners on, inter alia, DDR and Gender, DDR Training of Trainers, Economic Reintegration of Youth and Children, as well as on-line courses. In addition, country specific DDR training courses in Nepal, South Sudan and Cote d'Ivoire were funded and training evaluation tools piloted. A publicly accessible online resource centre[25] on DDR issues and an exchange platform for practitioners were developed. Additional support to the effective functioning of the IAWG-DDR secretariat facilitated enhanced coordination and pooling of resources on DDR processes, within and beyond the UN system.

· Police and Civilian Stabilisation Missions: Under ENTRi (‘Europe’s New Training Initiative for Civilian Crisis Management’), the capabilities of staff being deployed to and working in international civilian crisis management missions was further strengthened in 2012, while simultaneously fostering the inter-operability and the harmonisation of the 13 involved partners’ approaches to training. In its second year, ENTRi organised 19 pre-deployment and specialised courses for 407 experts of 53 nationalities. Besides the implementation of training, ENTRi worked on the harmonisation of courses and the establishment of international networks in the field of training for civilian crisis management, in cooperation with its associated partners, OSCE and the UN. It also offered certification to standardise the overall quality of courses provided within European training institutes. This certification process builds on previous practice in similar frameworks and focuses on course content as much as on training methodology.

Building on the success of the previous EU Police Forces Training Programme, the European Police Services Training Programme (EUPST) supported capacity building of police forces from EU and non-EU countries contributing to EU and African Union stabilisation missions. In its first year, a training exercise at the Guardia Civil Training Centre in Logroño, Spain, trained 301 police officers from EU and AU Member States (as well as from Canada, Croatia and Turkey).

8.           Conclusion

IfS measures implemented in 2012, complementing other EU actions under geographic and thematic development instruments, humanitarian assistance and CSDP missions, have contributed significantly to EU efforts to help prevent conflict, preserve peace, respond to crises and strengthen international security, in accordance with Article 21 of the Treaty of the European Union. In this respect, the wide range of interventions implemented under the Instrument for Stability enabled significant and visible EU responses with respect to many crisis situations around the globe.

Such challenges in 2012 included the evolving situation of the Arab Spring in the Middle East and North Africa region which, two years down the line, continues to not only shape the future of the entire region but also has repercussions far beyond the countries concerned, as well as on volatile situations in Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia.[26] The IfS will continue to be a key EU instrument in providing uniquely swift and targeted response to these countries and regions in their efforts to overcome obstables they are facing in consolidating peace and stability.

Given the continuing political instability and increasing number of natural disasters in many parts of the world, it is imperative to continue working towards the more efficient and effective deployment of the available EU instruments. In this context, the EU needs to ensure IfS actions are deployed as part of the full cycle of crisis prevention, crisis response and peace building measures. In turn, the strategic approach taken in the programming of long-term IfS actions has begun to yield results in the form of stronger links with key actors in various regions and more robust platforms from which to launch crisis response actions. It is this dynamic of effective conflict prevention that can reduce the future need for crisis response and intervention.

[1]               OJ L 327/1 24.11.2006

[2]               Where the IfS can complement the EU’s humanitarian and civil protection assistance, provided or co-ordinated by DG ECHO (Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection)

[3]               Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA); European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI); Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI); European Development Fund (EDF); and European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR); etc.

[4]               Maximum duration of 18 months, with accelerated procedures for adoption and implementation for programmes of less than EUR 20 million, as set out in Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as amended, referred to as the Financial Regulation, and the Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002, laying down detailed rules on the implementation of the Financial Regulation, referred to as the Implementing Rules.

[5]               Programmes building on ‘Exceptional assistance Measures’, to put in place the conditions for the implementation of the EU’s cooperation policies. These can be of longer duration but also require longer decisional processes, including comitology.

[6]               LRRD

[7]               Common Security and Defence Policy (of the EU)

[8]               Also known as the IfS ‘Peace-building Partnership’ (PbP)

[9]               Council Decision of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service (2010/427/EU), OJ L201

[10]             Directorate General for Development and Cooperation – EuropeAid, (European Commission)

[11]             Refer to ‘Instrument for Stability: Overview 2012 commitments and payments’ in the Commission Staff Working Document II accompanying this report

[12]             Legal and financial responsibility for the use of EU funds, including power to sign and amend contracts as appropriate is transferred from the European Commission headquarters in Brussels to the EU Delegation concerned.

[13]             Expert Support Facility Framework Contract, drawing on specialists from public or semi-public organisations from the EU. Since 2008, experts from about 60 organisations in 17 Member States have carried out over 100 missions.

[14]             For example, export control of dual-use goods, illicit trafficking, redirection of former weapons scientists, safety and security culture.

[15]             Export Control and Related Border Security Assistance

[16]             The 2012 Annual Action Programme was adopted by the European Commission on 20th March 2012 and is available at http://www.eeas.europa.eu/ifs/docs/index_en.htm

[17]             Actions were grouped thematically under the following components: Improving the capacity of non-state actors; Promoting Early Warning Capabilities; Climate Change, Natural Resources and International Security; Re-inforced co-operation on building pre- and post-crisis capacity with EU Member States.

[18]             Council conclusions on conflict prevention, 3101st Foreign Affairs Council meeting, Luxembourg. 20 June 2011

[19]             The CSDN is managed by the European Peace-building Liaison Office (EPLO).

[20]             Europe for Citizens Programme, Action 2 - Active Civil Society in Europe; Action: Support for projects initiated by civil society organisations

[21]             AAP 2010: Bolivia, Nicaragua (regional), Pakistan, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Timor-Leste; AAP 2011: Burundi, Central Africa, Chad, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Jordan, Lebanon, Solomon Islands.

[22]             IfS project "Equipping National and Local Actors in Internal Conflict Management Processes with Skills for Dialogue and Constructive Negotiation" implemented by BCPR in cooperation with EU Delegations in a number of pilot countries under AAP 2011

[23]             This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence

[24]                http://www.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/Introduction/EnvironmentalCooperationforPeacebuilding/OtherECPActivities/UNEUPartnership/tabid/54648/Default.aspx

[25]             http://unddr.org/meet-the-team/introduction_14.aspx

[26]             European Council Press Release (A 70/13) 'EU's Response to the "Arab Spring": The State-of-Play after Two Years". Brussels, 08 February 2013, p.4