Welcome Speech By Mr Raymond Lim, Minister, Prime Minister's Office And Second Minister For Foreign Affairs And Finance At The Mediators’ Retreat Singapore 2005, 21 November 2005, Sentosa Resort and Spa, 1pm

Mr Martin Griffiths
Director
Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue

Mr K Kesavapany
Director
Institute for Southeast Asian Studies

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me extend to you a warm welcome to Singapore.

2 I commend the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) for convening the Mediators Retreat Singapore 2005. I understand that this is the first time that the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue has organised this retreat for senior conflict mediators outside of Oslo, Norway. Singapore is honoured to host the first of such retreats in Southeast Asia. I am pleased to see the presence of a very distinguished group of mediators, government policy makers and UN representatives.

3 Today, I would like to share with you my thoughts on two broad trends relating to mediation: firstly, how the concept of mediation is undergoing changes with the changing nature of conflicts, and secondly, the increasing prominence of dialogue and mediation in conflict resolution.

Changing nature of mediation

4 The end of the Cold War saw a spike in intra-state conflicts and collapsing states. The situations in Sudan, Haiti, Guinea and Cote d'Ivoire come to mind. We see fewer classical conflicts among nations. This broad trend has started to re-shape the concept of mediation. Previously, mediation work focussed mainly on post-conflict mediation between states in conflict. The rise of internal conflicts prompted debates on the merits of early engagement. Such engagement could mean trying to prevent state failures or at least to restore state institutions.

5 In the past, non-governmental entities like the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue enjoyed greater latitude than governmental organisations like the UN in mediating in intra-state conflicts. Now, the UN may play a more proactive role.

6 The current international debate focuses on the UN's role in early mediation to prevent tense situations from degenerating into war or anarchy. UN-led initiatives connote international support and legitimacy. There is concern therefore that the UN's early involvement should not be exploited by bigger states as a vehicle to interfere arbitrarily in the domestic affairs of smaller states. These issues require careful consideration.

7 At the recent World Summit, the UN took tentative steps towards early mediation through the endorsement of the concept of the Responsibility to Protect. The Summit's outcome document stated that "The international community, through the United Nations, has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapter VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity".

8 Singapore supports the concept of the Responsibility to Protect. It is important for the international community to agree to a clear set of universally accepted rules for intervention. This enables the UN to step in and act decisively when genocide and crimes against humanity arise.

Increasing prominence of the importance of mediation

9 The value of mediation in conflict resolution alongside conventional hard power security measures is gaining prominence. The Report of the UN Secretary General's High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change recognised this. It recommended that more effort could and should be made by the UN to appoint skilled, experienced and regionally knowledgeable envoys, mediators and special representatives for conflict resolution.

10 As the former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill said, "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war." Early mediation which prevents tense situations from spiralling towards bloodshed and anarchy is an eminently preferred route to resolving conflicts. Successful mediation requires the painstaking efforts of skilful and trusted third-party mediators, who typically soldier on away from the public eye. The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue is no exception. It is no stranger to successful mediation in the region. On 15 August 2005, the Indonesian Government and the leadership of the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) signed a peace agreement in Finland, following negotiations facilitated by the Crisis Management Initiative. This peace agreement would probably not have been possible without the Centre. From as far back as 1999, the Centre has facilitated dialogue between the Indonesian government and GAM. Subsequently, the Centre also contributed to various mediation efforts between the two sides.

11 However, mediation is not a panacea to resolve all conflicts. The parties concerned must first agree to accept mediation for it to succeed. Unfortunately this usually happens only after at least one party and usually both (or more) become fatigued from a protracted period of fighting. Even if there is agreement to accept mediation, the ensuing process could be long and fraught with many setbacks. In our region, an example is the ongoing conflict in Sri Lanka between the Government and the Tamil Liberation Tigers.

12 What do the above trends mean for our region? Is there scope for more use of mediation as a conflict resolution tool of choice? How do they sit with the region's tradition of non-interference in the domestic affairs of states, particularly in political issues? Are the successes in places like Aceh the exceptions?

13 Over the next two days, you will be exchanging notes on your practical experiences in the field of mediation. Being seasoned practitioners you will be aware that no one model of mediation can be applied equally to all situations. Nevertheless, useful experiences can be shared and learnt. These include the conditions for mediation to succeed. You can also discuss the scope for mediation to shape the post-conflict phases to achieve institution building for sustainable peace and development.

14 Time permitting, you may also wish to explore whether there is a role for mediation in tackling new transnational issues involving non-state actors, such as terrorism. The challenge here lies in not legitimising transnational terrorist networks and other criminal syndicates.

Conclusion

15 In conclusion, international engagement can play a constructive role in conflict resolutions, including in the pre-conflict phase. While this is good news, it poses a wide array of new challenges and responsibilities. Given its political legitimacy and organisational strengths, the UN will naturally have an important role to play in conflict mediation.

16 However, non-governmental actors like the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and individual states have an equally important role to play. While the UN has strengths, it is limited in other ways, such as in dealing with non-state armed groups. Furthermore, each conflict situation is different and would require a different configuration of mediators. In this respect, the congregation of representatives from the UN, states actors and NGOs in this mediation retreat is very appropriate indeed. I hope you can have a useful discussion on how the tool and practice of mediation must adapt to our changing times, and the key ingredients for successful mediation in our region. I wish the retreat great success.

17 Thank you for your attention.
. . . .