Mr.President,

We compliment Slovakia, and you personally, on taking the initiative to put the important issue of Security Sector Reform on the agenda of the Security Council. We have appreciated our involvement in the preparatory seminars. We thank the Council for allowing us to participate in this debate. Germany has already spoken on behalf of the European Union. Let me add a few remarks.

Let me share with you some elements of the Dutch position on SSR, which are meant to be a constructive contribution to today's debate.

The phrase ‘no development without security and no security without development’ applies to all our countries, developing or developed alike.

Security of people - and not only security of states - is a precondition for development and development contributes to lasting peace and security, and hence prosperity.

 SSR, in our view, is not only essential in countries emerging from conflict. It can also play a crucial role in

The Netherlands recognizes the essential role which Security Sector Reform has to play in countries emerging from conflict. We also recognize that SSR is a political and often sensitive issue: it is not only about the effectiveness of security forces, but also about the accountability of power and democratic control. It has to be part of a framework of checks and balances.

Since SSR deals with so many actors - police, defence and intelligence services, security management and oversight bodies, justice institutions, customs and border control, and not in the least non governmental bodies and local groups, a comprehensive approach is required. This approach often has to be developed and implemented in a still unstable environment, where governance is weak or lacking, and state institutions are not functioning.

SSR is not only about training security services, or bringing in equipment, or building courts, but even more so, about developing governance structures and democratic processes.

SSR has to respond both to short term needs for security as well as to the long term need for stability.

SSR needs to be a nationally-owned process, embedded in a national development framework. It requiries an integrated and tailor-made approach. International support will often be necessary, but its modalities should not be imposed and should be carefully discussed with national stakeholders.

Mr.President, We believe that our common efforts should be better aligned. We welcome the request of the Security Council to ask the Secretary General to submit a report on UN wide approaches to SSR. Many different UN bodies and agents are working in this area and a more common understanding and approach is needed. The concept of integrated UN missions as we see in Burundi and Sierra Leone could provide good opportunities. The Peace Building Commission has a role in fostering such a joint approach as well. The PBC and the PBSO could help by getting relevant players around the table, by working with the country involved to design an SSR program and create coherence between security and development strategies.

As said, we recognize that SSR is a sensitive process. It has to do with control of power within a state. It touches on the sovereignty of the country involved. A very open and frank dialogue between the national and international players in a country in which SSR takes place is therefore quintessential.

Finally, Mr President, allow me to make a remark about international financial support to Security Sector Reform. The possibility of such support will depend to a large extent on the availability of non-ODA funds. Non-ODA funds however are rather scarce among donor countries. We therefore have developed specific mechanisms for pooled funding for the nexus of security and development. We believe that this issue should be further discussed.

In conclusion, Mr. President, this debate shows that there is momentum for a more focussed approach to SSR, in which the UN has an important role to play. The Netherlands is ready to support this approach.

Thank you.