Looking ahead often starts by looking back – checking where we have come from to reflect on where we are going. I have been engaged in peacebuilding for 26 years, most of those with Conciliation Resources. My first tentative steps in peacebuilding were taken in a different world. The Berlin Wall had recently fallen and the Cold War come to an end. Inspired by People’s Power in the Philippines and people seizing the space for autonomous action in Eastern Europe, civil society was demonstrating the power for change that could come from within societies. Conflict resolution and peacebuilding NGOs were coming into existence. The then UN Secretary General published an Agenda for Peace in 1992. A quarter of a century later the current Secretary General is again placing peace at the heart of his agenda; polarised relations with Russia are back on the global scene with a vengeance; and the space for civil society is being squeezed in all too many countries.

As Marc Baxmann and Natascha Zupan have written, the FriEnt Peacebuilding Forum showed the need for new partnerships to make sure the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development reaches people in conflict and post-conflict societies. The Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies is a universal platform helping countries from all income groups meet the SDG16+ targets – but its roadmap underlines the need for urgent action to support implementation in countries and communities that are at greatest risk of being left behind due to violence and insecurity, injustice and exclusion, and poor governance and weak institutions. Over the next year, we should focus on three priorities. We must stand up for SDG16+ ahead of 2019’s High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, invest in Pathways for Peace, and put violence prevention at the heart of the 2030 Agenda.

Security Sector Reform (SSR) and one of its components, i.e. ‘train and equip programs’ for security forces in third countries, range among the key instruments of the German government to promote security in conflict affected societies and fragile states. If we look at the debate about SSR which began shortly before the year 2000 in the development community and the realities on the ground, we can observe a polarized situation: SSR takes place in fragile political settings. Usually, these societies are characterized by four security relevant shortcomings: authoritarian and/or weak governments, insecurity of people in large sectors of society, corrupt security actors and abundance of weapons. In contrast, the ideal of SSR is the achievement of an effective and efficient provision of state and human security within a framework of democratic governance.

One of the recurring topics of this year’s FriEnt Peacebuilding Forum was the importance of partnerships and inclusivity to build and sustain peace. And not without a reason: Violent conflicts have not only increased in number in recent years; they have also become more complex and persistent. Often they are also closely connected with global challenges, such as climate change, growing inequalities or international organised crime. Their complex and interconnected nature means that isolated actions by individual actors quickly hit a glass ceiling. The challenges of our time require new ways of cooperating and collaborating with each other. And to do so, we have to abandon our silo mentality and stop breaking things down into phases.