The principal task of the MLT is to interpret the mandate and develop mission plans that implement the direction given by the mandate in the specific phase of the conflict or peace process. Mandates contain many tasks and directions, which are often added to or adjusted by the UN Security Council over time. Some of these tasks and directions may well be in tension with each other. Mandates often reflect the political concerns of UN Member States as much as realistic assessments of the practicality of implementing them. The MLT must also operationalize its complex and sometimes ambiguous mandate. This requires prioritization and context-specific planning, and adaptive management and learning, for example by innovating new methods or taking performance feedback into account.

The primary nature of any strategy – whether in the context of peace operations, humanitarian relief or development cooperation – is the relationship between ends, ways and means. In peace operations:

• ENDS are the objectives, such as creating a secure and stable environment or implementing a peace process;
• WAYS are the mechanisms through which stated objectives are pursued, such as diplomatic efforts or supporting elections or reconciliation; and
• MEANS relate to the resources available, such as political influence, personnel, equipment and international support.

It is crucial to ensure that the relationship between the ends, ways and means is fully understood, and that this understanding is logical, practical and clearly established from the outset. This requires mission- level planning. If there is no or little planning function the relationship between ends, ways and mean becomes incoherent, and successful mandate implementation will most likely be at risk.

The MLT will have to determine the priorities of the mission and consider what can practically be achieved within certain timelines. It must then be prepared to adjust these priorities and timelines as circumstances change – which they will. The MLT will need to balance its plans against the available human and financial resources, and should clearly define strategic goals, develop coordinated work plans and prioritize activities to ensure the efficient and effective delivery of support and proper resource allocation.

Depending on the mission’s leaders, mandates can be viewed either as a limitation on action or as an opportunity for engagement and proactive thinking. Prior to deployment, the HoM should have frank discussions with the leadership of the UN Department of Peace Operations (DPO), the UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA), the UN Department of Operational Support (DOS) and other relevant departments and offices in order to arrive at a common understanding of the mandate and its intentions.

In addition, both host-state and international engagement will be essential. Systematic consultation will be required when developing the mission’s key priorities. The host state should co-own these priorities and constitute a significant and positive pull factor. The international community will need to provide both political and financial support. All this must be achieved while maintaining integrity in accordance with the UN’s normative framework.
The strategic assessment and subsequent integrated planning are critical tools for determining priorities. This analysis should take a number of factors into consideration, such as the structural, intermediate and immediate causes of the conflict as well as drivers of peace, the history and characteristics of the host country, the UN’s political prerequisites and the role of regional and international actors. A strategic assessment is the building block that forms the basis for the development of the UN’s shared goals, formulation of the mandate and the Integrated Assessment and Planning Framework. The assessment should contain an analysis of the drivers of peace and conflict, including of the key factors and the actors and capacities on the ground, and the resources to undertake the operation, as well as the impact of ongoing operations to ensure they apply the “do no harm” principle. In addition, it should assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that might trigger change or influence transition.

While a great deal of information and analysis will be available from UNHQ and will have been used to develop the mission’s mandate, further analysis will need to be undertaken at the mission level based on the information obtained from host-country actors, other international organizations, UN Member States, and external experts and academics. Mission analysis should be a collaborative, multi-disciplinary undertaking that addresses all the various activities that UN components, agencies and programmes propose to undertake. The process of mission analysis by the MLT should be dynamic and continuous to reflect the changing environment.

As part of the mission analysis, the MLT should also consider early peacebuilding activities that are achievable, and which might be initiated by the mission in support of other international and regional actors and the host country. Early opportunities to lay the foundations for sustainable peace and development, in close collaboration with the UN Country Team (UNCT), need to be aligned with broader national and international responses, and the ability to coordinate with national authorities and other partners. The MLT should also identify benchmarks that indicate the efficiency, effectiveness and legitimacy of national institutions and their ability to absorb competence and resources from external partners. It is important to ensure that measures of effectiveness are incorporated into any subsequent UN implementation plan in order to measure and assess the impact the mission is having and, where necessary, to identify corrective action.

Finally, the MLT will need to be aware that, in implementing a mandate, the relationship between the mission and the host government will be dynamic and change over time. The close political engagement that is required and highly sought after in the early days of a mission may become less welcome or even resented as national interests manifest themselves in different ways. What is possible at first may become harder to achieve later in the process – for example, after elections. The MLT needs to be alert to and prepared for these shifts, which could indicate the waning influence of the mission and its ability to sustain the peace process and the mandate. Close and forward-looking coordination with the UN Secretariat and the Security Council will be essential. Developments such as these, however, are natural in the life cycles of most missions and are not necessarily negative. Peace operations, after all, are about encouraging the development of self- determination, as long as it is peaceful.

How well a mission starts, or handles critical junctures, is likely to determine its future progress and credibility. The perception of a mission among the host government and population is dynamic and is often formed against the backdrop of how well it delivers on key expectations.