The case for a board of peace and sustainable security

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 International Relations – Important International institutions, agencies and fora – their structure, mandate. The case for a board of peace and sustainable security.

Introduction

The UN turns 80 with a sharp gap between ideals and structures. The Security Council reacts to crises but does not sustain peace. Political engagement ends too soon; conflicts persist, deals falter, transitions stall. Instead of waiting for slow constitutional change, the General Assembly can create a Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS) to provide steady political accompaniment and link peacekeeping to achievable political paths.

Issue with United Nations (UN)

1. Episodic responses: The UN moves from crisis to crisis. Diplomacy starts late, ends early, and once violence dips, attention shifts away, so fragile settlements lose direction and momentum.
2. No continuity mechanism: After mediation peaks, no body stays engaged. Without a standing anchor, political accompaniment fades and early understandings are not carried into implementation.
3. Peacekeeping–politics gap: Missions stabilise security but often lack a linked political roadmap. Without sustained negotiation and monitoring, transitions stall even with troops present.
4. Reform bottleneck: Security Council reform is necessary but slow. Waiting first is a mistake. Under Article 22, the General Assembly can create new subsidiary bodies (like the BPSS) to strengthen action without challenging Council primacy or altering the Charter.

For detailed information on UNSC Reforms read this article here

Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS) as solutions

1.Purpose and scope of the BPSS

• A Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS) would fill the institutional void that undermines conflict resolution..
• A Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS) would work during and after conflict, where UN political presence is low. It would not do early warning, not intrude on sovereignty, and not rival the Council.
• Use political tools, not force: It would reinforce national dialogue, accompany peace agreement implementation, coordinate regional diplomacy, and ensure peacekeeping links to achievable political pathways rather than becoming indefinite holding missions.
• Fit within the UN system: Working with the Secretary-General and the Security Council, the BPSS would subsume the Peacebuilding Commission and align peacekeeping and peacebuilding with clear political outcomes.

2. Structure of the BPSS

• Representative: Membership would be a rotating group of about two dozen states, elected by the General Assembly for fixed terms.
• Regional bodies as participants: Regional balance would be guaranteed across Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, and West Asia.Organisations from these regions would be participants, not observers.
• No vetoes: The board would rest on participation, not privilege.
• Agenda items: It could be introduced only by a UN member-state, a regional organisation, or the Secretary-General. Civil society would have consultative input, no voting.

3. Working mechanism of the BPSS

• A working body: The BPSS would stay engaged when others leave, track commitments after the spotlight moves on, and preserve institutional memory between mandate renewals. It would reduce drift in long engagements.
• Modest form, real impact: The mandate looks small but shapes outcomes. It delivers disciplined political accompaniment, builds continuity without expansion, and coordinates actors without confrontation. States keep sovereignty; societies gain confidence that peace will not be dropped.
• Core principle: Peace lasts when political deals earn legitimacy through governance, inclusion, and responsible leadership. The board links security to political reality and ties missions to achievable political paths.

Way forward

1. Legal step: The General Assembly should use Article 22 now to create the BPSS and fix the lack of political continuity from war to peace.
2. Regional role: Guarantee fair regional balance. Make regional organisations full participants, not observers, to anchor decisions in local realities.
3. Coordination and respect: Work with the Secretary-General and the Security Council. Fold in the Peacebuilding Commission to avoid overlap. Coordinate without confrontation. Respect sovereignty at all stages
4. Accountability and learning: Publish brief progress notes, share lessons across cases, and adjust tactics quickly. Use simple, shared indicators to measure political traction, not just security calm.

For detailed information on On the shortcomings of UN read this article here

Conclusion

Meaningful reform can begin now by creating a Board of Peace and Sustainable Security that restores continuity, context, and momentum to UN engagement. This board would not rewrite power balances, but it would strengthen the UN’s capacity to manage conflict responsibly. Institutions are built not for moments but for processes. The UN once understood this; it can understand it again—by innovating where it still can.

Question for practice:

Examine how creating a Board of Peace and Sustainable Security under UNGA Article 22 can address the UN’s lack of post-conflict political continuity without challenging Security Council primacy.

Source: The Hindu