Political freedom has been achieved across Africa, but in many places freedom from poverty and sickness, and freedom from fear and persecution in the exercise of the fundamental rights, is still a dream. The mountain-tops are nearer but nowhere as close as they should be by now.

I have known a little bit of Africa for a long time. In the late fifties and early sixties the march to freedom across Africa thrilled me as a student; from the mid-sixties on I was engaged in development cooperation with Africa, meeting many leaders of liberation movements on their visits to Finland and elsewhere. But I only began to fully understand Africa when I moved to Tanzania with my family as Finnish Ambassador in 1973.

I had then the opportunity to meet and learn from great African leaders. Presidents Julius Nyerere, Kenneth Kaunda, Samora Machel were among the leaders with vision who made me understand that the way forward, from formal freedom to genuine development, must be an African way, chosen by Africans themselves.

Talks with Brigadier Hashim Mbita of the OAU Liberation Committee and others gave me insights into the liberation struggle that was still going on in Southern Africa. Regular meetings with leaders of the liberation movements had the same effect.

All of my contacts then gave me excellent on-the-job training, albeit unintentionally, for my future dealings with Africa, Namibia in particular.

The process leading to Namibia´s independence was long and hard, and required commitment, determination and patience, especially from the Namibians. In the end, all the key actors inside and outside Namibia were persuaded to work towards achieving a mutually acceptable goal. The process taught me that a durable solution to a conflict can only be found if the mediator is prepared to engage in negotiations with all those who count in achieving a solution - however much parties to the conflict detest and oppose such engagement. I strongly believe that this is true for the Middle East too.

There is another lesson to be learned from the Namibian experience: treat your opposition decently once in power. How often has it happened that winner takes it all, ignoring and not tolerating voice of opposition? President Nyerere got it right. After a referendum showed that a 70 percent majority supported one-party rule but a minority of 30 percent supported multi-party-democracy President Nyerere said that this was enough for Tanzania to respect the voice of opposition. Democracy can only be achieved when those in power respect minority views and understand the value of the political participation of the opposition.

Mr. Chairman, The creation of the African Union in 2002 was a milestone in developing collective security among African member states. The African Union has since been instrumental in establishing a security management system that includes the Peace and Security Council with its supporting mechanisms. The AU has brought about a significant improvement in the ability of Africa to promote stability, anticipate and prevent conflicts, promote and facilitate peace processes, and support post-conflict reconstruction. It has also improved the coordination and harmonization of regional efforts aimed at the prevention and management of conflicts.

Regrettably, these undeniable achievements have not received the international recognition to the extent they should have.

Nonetheless, with the contribution of the African Union and of individual Africans, my friend Kofi Annan among them, Africa is entering into a new era of conflict resolution and peace mediation. The successful solution of a number of conflicts is a clear indication that Africans can deal with African problems. I could not be more pleased with this development.

The United Nations remains the most important peace-making body in the world. There simply is no alternative. Despite all the deficiencies in its make-up and ways of work - and these do need to be remedied urgently - the UN Security Council remains a unique source of authority for peace-making and peacekeeping. Its decisions confer legitimacy and resources. It is of vital importance that all members of the Organization get a chance to be represented in the Council. Peace is our common responsibility. It is therefore that my own country, Finland, is now seeking a seat on the Security Council for the term 2013-2014.

But even a reformed UN would not be able do it alone. The Organisation is constrained and over-burdened with mandates for which it does not have adequate resources. This is not likely to change anytime soon. Others must pitch in more, obviously in close cooperation with the UN. The African Union sets an example how regional organizations can develop and exercise a capacity to broker and maintain peace regionally.

Mr. Chairman, The roots of my career as a peace mediator go back to my childhood years. I was born in the city of Viipuri, then still part of Finland. We lost Viipuri when the Soviet Union attacked my country in 1939. With 400000 fellow Finns I became an eternally displaced person in my own country - with no right of return or no recompense from those who wronged my family. This experience, which millions of other people around the world share, provided me with sensitivity and desire to advance peace.

Because of my background, I recognize both the challenges and the opportunities of peace. It is not that long ago that Europe was racked by war. We should never take peace for granted, anywhere.

I have been asked many times how mediation should be pursued, what are the methodologies and techniques that are needed. I believe there is no one answer; however I see mediation more of as the art of the possible rather as a set of rules. There is immense complexity and variety in brokering an end to a conflict. My experience is that every conflict is a special case - simply because it is special to the parties that fight it. But this is not an excuse to avoid learning from our mistakes and making efforts to do better. I would like to share with you five simple insights that I believe should be taken into account.

Firstly, the work of a mediator and the signing of a peace agreement must be understood as being only one part of a much deeper process starting with conflict prevention and continuing through to peace-building meaning that poverty needs to be eradicated and human security for all provided for.

Secondly, our values must be an anchor in peacemaking: this most important resource that a mediator can rely on is his or her own values. As we know, some of these may be culturally bound but many are universal.

Thirdly, we need to be open when resolving conflicts. When talking about mediation of internal conflicts, it is evident that the very principle of sovereignty is at stake. Governments of war-torn societies are often reluctant to internationalize their internal conflicts. Such governments often consider offers of involvement by the United Nations, African Union or individual states, however well-meant, as intolerable interference and an insult to their hard-won sovereignty.

However, all my peace assignments have taught me that a peace process is largely a matter of cooperation and partnership between different actors, parties to a conflict, other peace mediators, governments, the civic society and international organizations. Therefore in preventing and resolving conflicts a conventional, purely state-centric approach is not an option in all cases. Sometimes we have to challenge the conventional way of doing business. Non-governmental actors can play a pivotal role as facilitators or mediators. My own experience with Namibia and with the Aceh conflict in Indonesia bears this out but there are other examples, too.

Specialised organizations in this field, such as the independent organization I founded a decade ago in 2000 namely the Crisis Management Initiative (CMI), are important centres of excellence. They do and can support the capacity of the international community in comprehensive crisis management and conflict resolution. The work is done by analysing and monitoring conflicts, facilitating early responses and detecting early warnings, mediating, strengthening networks of track II actors and fostering multi-track mediation.

Furthermore, mediation that is geared to peace-building inevitably requires the transformation of society at all levels. This work is not simply the monopoly of governments. Therefore civil society should not and cannot be marginalized; indeed, they are part of the core business.

Fourthly we need to cultivate the next generation of peacemakers. This means supporting the systematization of mediation practice and the provision of the necessary technical expertise to the mediator. I am proud that the government of Finland is assisting in building mediation capacity on the African continent including through a partnership between the AU, CMI and ACCORD. This partnership will bring expertise and support to AU mediators, AU special envoys and mechanisms such as the Panel of the Wise, with the simple of aim of bringing peace to the African continent.

Fifth, and finally, I believe that building state and societal structures in conflict affected countries is one of the most effective ways to prevent future conflicts. But I also think it is one of the greatest challenges we have at the moment and perhaps one of the most complicated ones.

When asked about the biggest needs people have in post-conflict situations, the answer most often is that people want to be treated fairly by the police and the courts. In other words, as the first priority governments need to provide the individual security of the citizens and guarantee the respect of the rule of law. Without adequate security there is no chance for lasting development. It is only a secure society - not a strong state - that makes people truly secure.

Mr. Chairman, I am seriously concerned about the large number of conflicts that the international community has not solved. We should never accept and allow that some conflicts remain frozen forever, and in consequence people suffer. A peace process is important but we have to be result oriented. This means more skills, more resources, and more pressure from the international community. Each unresolved conflict is to be seen as a vital challenge. We cannot allow ourselves to accept frozen conflicts: it means that we do not try seriously enough to solve them. Most importantly, we need to acknowledge that there are things that we can still learn about making peace.

In this, the Africa Union is setting a fine example for other regional organizations in developing the capacity to mediate within the global framework of the United Nations. I wish the African Union all the best of success in this challenging but necessary task.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen - I thank you

Return