The United Nations Security Council has renewed the mandate of the UN Mission in South Sudan, allowing the peace support operation to continue for another year. The renewal process raised concerns about the future of US policy on UN peace operations, particularly in South Sudan. The US has played a significant role in UN peace operations, including UNMISS, which was established in 2011 to support the newly independent nation.
UNMISS’s mandate has shifted over the years, from supporting peace consolidation and state capacity building to prioritizing civilian protection after the outbreak of civil war in 2013. The mission’s latest mandate includes protecting civilians, implementing the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, and monitoring human rights. Despite its importance, UNMISS’s effectiveness has been hindered by resource shortfalls and the failure of parties in South Sudan to honor the peace agreement.
The US submitted a draft resolution for the mandate renewal, which led to disagreements among council members. The US proposed applying more political pressure on South Sudan’s leaders and introduced new terminology, replacing previously agreed-on language. This included changing “sexual and gender-based violence” to “violence against women and girls” and removing wording on misinformation and disinformation. The changes reflect domestic policy under the current US administration, including on gender and climate issues.
Several council members opposed the language changes, citing concerns that they would erode the UNSC’s established normative standard. The US eventually tabled a revised draft resolution, which reinstated most of the previously agreed wording and was adopted. The US decision to withdraw its small contingent of peacekeepers from UNMISS in April, as the mandate was being negotiated, has raised questions about its commitment to UN peace operations.
The US has been the largest financial contributor to UN peace operations, providing up to 27% of the annual budget. However, recent developments suggest a shift in US policy, including a proposal to scrap UN peacekeeping funding and a decision not to pledge contributions at the UN Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin. A White House report also announced plans to cancel $5 billion in funding for international organizations and foreign aid, including $838 million for peace operations.
The implications of a reduced US role in UN peace operations are significant, particularly for missions like UNMISS, which rely heavily on US financial and political support. As the UN reviews its peace operations to ensure their adaptability to the current threat landscape, the US has an opportunity to reconsider its policy and strengthen its commitment to multilateral peace efforts. The continued relevance of UN peace operations is widely recognized, and a viable alternative to meet the growing demand for conflict response is lacking.
