Quo Vadis UN Peace Keeping?
[i-UN helmet]
"Tall trees catch a lotta wind", the saying goes. With cost of UN peace keeping operations now peaking at US$8 billion per year, no wonder the troubled UN department is front page news (again).
Deploying and supporting its record number of 113,000 staff, the blue helmets came into the press cross-fire (again) due to the most recent debacles in DRC and Darfur where they don't seem to have any direct positive impact on the peace process.
But one should look at both sides. It is all to easy to blame it on "the UN", as if it was some piece of soap in a bathtub: difficult to grab, and a generic nuisance. "The UN" does what its memberstates define what it should do. If member states only want a 'token' peace force in some country, a 'token' it will remain, despite best efforts on the ground.
Two pieces I recently read, at least tried, to see things in perspective. One from the New York Times:
More than a decade after United Nations peacekeepers failed to prevent massacres in Rwanda and Srebrenica, Bosnia, what many consider the organization’s flagship mission appears to be slouching toward crisis once again, diplomats and other experts say.And one from the book "Blood River" by Tim Butcher (more on this book in a later post):
The most immediate cause, they say, is a sharp rise in the number of peacekeeping commitments worldwide and a type of “mission creep” that has added myriad nation-building duties to the traditional task of trying to keep enemies apart. The new demands come at a time when member states with advanced armies in particular have become more resistant to committing additional troops or even necessary equipment like helicopters.
Those challenges have only added to a deeper and longstanding problem: the continued lack of clarity about how the United Nations should intervene when its members lack either the military force or the political will — or both — to halt carnage.
“Peacekeeping has been pushed to the wall,” said Bruce Jones, the director of the Center on International Cooperation at New York University, which is working with the United Nations on reform efforts. “There is a sense across the system that this is a mess — overburdened, underfunded, overstretched.” (Full)
I have seen numerous UN missions around the world, in Bosnia, Sierra Leone, Liberia and all over the Middle east. Each was castigated by the international media and commentators for being inefficient, bureaucratic and ineffective, but such criticism always misses the point.Picture courtesy genetologisch-onderzoek.nl Read the full post...
Yes, the missions are sloppy and poorly focused, but that is precisely because the international community's attitude to complicated problems like the collapsing Yugoslavia, or rampaging west African rebels, is sloppy and poorly focused.
When the United Nations Security Council addresses these international problems, the questions it ends up answering is not 'What is the right thing to do?' but 'What is the least we can do?'. UN missions around the world evolve at the pace of the lowest common denominator between the nations of the world, and that common denominator is pretty low when nations with interests as divergent as China and America both hold prominent positions in the UN Security Council.
News: UN Peacekeeping runs out of money, troops
UN Peace Keeping in trouble[i-UN Peace Keeping in trouble]Few reasons to celebrate UN Peacekeeping's 60th anniversary: the world peace body seems to head for a crisis: Demand for blue helmets around the world skyrockets while financial contributions dwindle and reserves of well-trained soldiers dry up.
The UN peacekeeping department (DPKO) has grown exponentially since its first mission in 1948, to the current annual budget of $7.1 billion.
UN officials say even that budget is insufficient as the United Nations prepares for a mission to Somalia and to expand current missions in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Chad and the Central African Republic. (Full)
[Ed: Hint- try rationalizing expenditure, transparent auditing and evaluating missions based on actual performance. Quality sells!]
More on The Road about UN and UN peacekeeping.
Picture courtesy UNESCAP
Picture of the day: UN-protected or Unprotected?
Fullscreen capture 10112008 094444 PM-1[i-Fullscreen capture 10112008 094444 PM-1]
A girl touches a U.N. armored vehicle as she walks in the street in the provincial capital of Goma, Congo. The UN's top human rights official slammed government forces in Congo for lootings, killings and rapes in the city of Goma, amid fears of a humanitarian disaster. Meanwhile the UN peace keepers keep on drawing criticism about their limited response to the crisis.
More Pictures of the Day on The Road
Picture courtesy Yasuyoshi Chiba-AFP/Getty Images
News: UN Peacekeepers - sexual misconduct scandals continue...
UN Peacekeepers in DRC[i-UN Peacekeepers in DRC]Although a group of Indian peacekeeping soldiers accused of sexual abuse in eastern Congo have returned home, allegations of misconduct continue to surround the battalion.
The United Nations confirmed last month that an internal investigation had uncovered credible evidence that members of an Indian unit stationed in North Kivu province “may have engaged in sexual exploitation and abuse”.
A UN source said around 100 peacekeepers from India allegedly used children both to work for them and to hire Congolese girls for sex, using the children as domestic servants and to pimp for prostitutes, some as young as 12 or 13 years old.
Peacekeepers are strictly forbidden to socialise with local people, but Mapendo Polepole, a 28-year-old prostitute from Goma, who heads an organisation of women living with AIDS, testified Indian soldiers from the camp in central Goma are regular customers.
“They have sexual intercourse with us, without condoms, in their jeeps, during a patrol and in their camps,” she said, adding that the soldiers pay 20 US dollars for her services rather than the going rate of two dollars. (Full)
More posts on The Road about UN Peace Keepers
Source: International Aid Workers Today
Picture courtesy: AP Photo / Sayyid Azim
Picture of the day: A Thin Coat of Blue
darfur-un-peacekeepers[i-darfur-un-peacekeepers]
Despite the newly painted blue helmets, after six months on the ground, the United Nations-African Union peacekeepers in Darfur have yet to make an impact. (Full)
More Pictures of the Day on The Road.
Picture courtesy Alfred de Montesquiou (AP)
News: Ugandan UN Peace Keepers accused of selling arms in Somalia
Ugandan peace keepers in Somalia[i-Ugandan peace keepers in Somalia]A report by the UN monitoring group on the Somali arms embargo says Ugandan peacekeepers in Somalia have been selling arms to insurgents.
It cites one incident in which a group of Ugandan soldiers allegedly received $80,000 for a transaction. Some peacekeepers are accused of setting up an arms trading network through translators. The soldiers received a wish-list of weapons from arms dealers and the weapons were then supplied from stores of equipment seized from insurgents. The monitoring group says the weapons find their way back to the insurgent group they were captured from in the first place.
The Ugandan army has already dismissed the accusations as "absolutely ridiculous." (Full)
More posts on The Road about UN Peace Keeping operations.
Source: International Aidworkers Today
Picture courtesy Gambia News Community
News: UN Peace Keepers muffle negative inspection report
link[i-link]I wrote before about the BBC and the Human Rights Watch reports on abuse by UN peace keepers in Congo, smuggling gold and drugs out of the country in exchange for weapons they gave to the rebels.
The UN decided that "in the absence of corroborative evidence" its investigators "could not substantiate the allegation" that Pakistani peacekeepers supplied weapons or ammunition to the militia.
The New York Times just published an article by Matthias Basanisi, the UN's deputy chief investigator in Congo at that time. He reveals nothing short but an orchestrated cover-up of the scandal:
I was the investigator in charge of the United Nations team that in 2006 looked into allegations of abuses by Pakistani peacekeepers in Congo and found them credible. But the investigation was taken away from my team after we resisted what we saw as attempts to influence the outcome. My fellow team members and I were appalled to see that the oversight office’s final report was little short of a whitewash.
The reports we submitted to the office’s senior management in 2006 included credible information from witnesses confirming illegal deals between Pakistani peacekeepers and warlords from the Front for National Integration, an ethnic militia group notorious for its cruelty even in such a brutal war. We found corroborative information that senior officers of the Pakistani contingent secretly returned seized weapons to two warlords in exchange for gold, and that the Pakistani peacekeepers tipped off two warlords about plans by the United Nations peacekeeping force and the Congolese Army to arrest them.
And yet, much of the evidence we uncovered was excluded from the final report released last summer, including corroboration from the warlords themselves. (Full)
I wonder what is worse now: Trading weapons with warring fractions you are supposed to protect the people from, in exchange for gold and drugs you smuggle out of the country. Or covering up the inspection report revealing this abuse?
Source: The Gstaad Project, International Aidworkers Today Read the full post...
News: UN troops smuggled gold, ivory and 'armed Congo rebels'
link[i-link]An 18-month BBC investigation for Panorama has found evidence that:
- Pakistani peacekeepers in the eastern town of Mongbwalu were involved in the illegal trade in gold with the FNI militia (described by Human Rights Watch as "some of the most murderous individuals that operate in eastern Congo"), providing them with weapons to guard the perimeter of the mines.
- The Indians traded gold, bought drugs from the militias and flew a UN helicopter into the Virunga National Park, where they exchanged ammunition for ivory.
A UN investigation concluded that one officer had been responsible for dealing in gold - allowing traders to use UN aircraft to fly into the town, putting them up at the UN base and taking them around the town. But the UN decided that "in the absence of corroborative evidence" its investigators "could not substantiate the allegation" that Pakistani peacekeepers supplied weapons or ammunition to the militia.
It did, however, identify "an individual who seemed to have facilitated gold smuggling".
The BBC allegations were confirmed by militia leaders. UN insiders close to the investigation told the BBC they had been prevented from pursuing their inquiries for political reasons. (Full)
My comments:
This is despicable and a slap in the face of those UN humanitarians who do try to make a difference.
It is not the first time the UN peacekeeping (UNDPKO) troops have been discredited by scandals (see the post Sometimes I am ashamed to work for the UN). A lack of consequent leadership in UNDPKO, a lack of accountability, direct and clear lines of command, proper supervision, proper screening of the troops, justice for those offending the rules, transparent and public auditing... and above all a lack of political will to structurally make a change to avoid similar scandals from happening again and again.
Update May 2: Human Rights Watch claims UN investigators in Congo ignored misconduct (Full)
Via International Aid Workers Today
Picture courtesy Marco Longari (AFP), BBC
News: Darfur peacekeepers: UN-armed or unarmed?
link[i-link]On April 9th, gunmen have attacked a UNAMID (UN African Mission in Darfur) police patrol, two kilometres (one mile) from the Zam Zam camp for internally displaced persons.
The officers were ordered out of their vehicles and the four gunmen stole their personal belongings and official identity cards. One officer was repeatedly hit in the neck by the back of an AK-47 when he hesitated in obeying instructions to get back into the vehicle.
"UNAMID police do not carry weapons and Wednesday's patrol was operating without protection", according to Noureddine Mezni, the UN African Mission spokesman. He added that "this was for confidence-building purposes and for easier contact with the civilians they aim to protect". (Full)
More posts on The Road, about Darfur and Sudan.
Picture courtesy Reuters
News: Sometimes I Am Ashamed to Work for the UN.
UNinvolved - From Die Burger; Advertising Agency: FCB Cape Town; South Africa; Creative Director: Francois de Villiers; Art Director: Anthony de Klerk; Copywriter: Marius van Rensburg; Photographer: Chad Henning[i-UNinvolved - From Die Burger; Advertising Agency: FCB Cape Town; South Africa; Creative Director: Francois de Villiers; Art Director: Anthony de Klerk; Copywriter: Marius van Rensburg; Photographer: Chad Henning]
I am pissed off. Two articles were published in the last days that make me ashamed to work for the UN.
Before we start, let me make something clear: The "UN" is one "brand" consisting of several parts which have completely different goals, operational practices and funding mechanisms. In fear of over-simplifying, I would distinguish three main parts in the UN:
- "The Political Side", UN secretariat in New York and UN security council, are probably the UN's most visible side. In this large forum "where world issues are debated and decided upon", every nation has its vote and voice. The critics would say "all equal, but some have a bigger vote and a louder voice than others".
This side of the UN is funded through direct contributions by the UN member countries, and as such by the taxes citizens like you and me pay. - "The Peace Keeping Side", codenamed "UNDPKO", are the famous blue helmet-ed forces we see on TV. Stationed in conflict zones like Sudan, Eritrea, DRC etc... they often work hand in hand with the UN Department of Political Affairs in enforcing political and military stability in (potential) conflict zones. Just as "the Political Side", the "Peace Keeping Side" is funded by the UN members. Once again, your tax dollar "at work" (well.. "not at work" would sometimes be more appropriate).
- "The UN Humanitarians" are not one organisation, but a few hundred organisations. Well-known names in this branch are UNICEF, WHO, WFP, UNHCR, UNDP etc... Most of these organisations are "voluntary" funded. This means they do not receive annual funding from the UN headquarters, but they launch appeals for each of their projects, be it in the development or emergency relief sector.
The "voluntary funding" scheme the humanitarian organisations work under, is somewhat an insurance those organisations are "kept on their toes". If you screw up a project well enough, donors will be less eager to fund your projects next time. The "humanitarian market" (as I like to call it), is a competitive market. The need for funding exceeds the "capacity of the world to donate". So "competition" keeps the humanitarian organisations somewhat in line. "Somewhat", is the right term though, but we will expand on this another time.
Now, what pisses me off on a regular basis, is that the "UN number 2" from above, the "Peace Keeping Side", often gets involved in all kinds of bad press.
You still remember the reports about UN peacekeepers unable to prevent the Rwanda genocide? Or the Srebrenica massacres where the Dutch UN peace keepers "stood by". There were many reasons why these tragedies happened. And even more excuses.
Totally UNexcusable are, amongst others, the sex scandals (the whole works including pedophilia, rape and prostitution) by UN Peace Keepers in DRC and in Haiti. link[i-link]Or the gruesome stories of Belgian UN Peace Keepers "roasting" a Somali boy. (read also this this article).
Shame, deep shame, we should all have. All of us.
While most of the time, I can still tell myself, "Ok, this is not concerning the UN humanitarians, this is not 'us', this is the 'other UN arm'." Still, the criminals wore the same colour as I do: "UN Blue". They went into a country supposedly to help the population, and not to kill people and urinating on them afterwards, sexually abusing them.
I want to be able to keep my head up high, tough. Once of the reasons I continue to work for the UN (For a number 3, a UN humanitarian organisation), is to be able to say: "I not only criticize. I actually try to make a change."! And the best way to make a change is a "change from within". I try to speak up when confronted with any wrongdoing. While it gave me the reputation of being "difficult" (they say "a pain in the a**"), I do need to live with my conscience. I need to be able to say "I tried my level best". And to be honest, I feel people *do* listen. At least where *I* work!
But still, ... still, there are those days, like today, where I get frustrated, pissed off, wandering if all the fighting is worth it. Those are the days, like today, where I read that the audit of the UN peace keeping mission in Sudan wasted millions of dollars: (Below is an extract but the full post is here):
U.N. officers in Sudan have squandered millions by renting warehouses that were never used, booking blocks of hotel rooms that were never filled, and losing thousands of food rations to theft and spoilage, according to several internal audits by the U.N. Office for International Oversight Services. One U.N. purchasing agent has been accused of steering a $589,000 contract for airport runway lights to a company that helped his wife obtain a student visa, while two senior procurement officials from the United States and New Zealand have been charged by a U.N. panel with misconduct for not complying with rules designed to prevent corruption.
The U.N. procurement division "did not have the necessary capacity and expertise to handle the large magnitude of procurement actions" in Sudan, particularly during the early phases of the mission, according to a confidential October 2006 audit. Investigators also detected "a number of potential fraud indicators and cases of mismanagement and waste."
It pisses me off that millions of dollars are wasted through mere miss-management or for personal gain, in a country where millions fight to survive starvation every single day.
Also today, I read how the United Nations forces failed to help East Timor's president Jose Ramos Horta after he was shot in an assassination attempt in Dili this morning:
Mr Carrascalao told ABC Radio's PM that when UN police arrived at the scene of the attack they refused to help.
"I have to regret that we advised the United Nations Police who went to the scene but 300 metres before reaching there, they refused to proceed," he said. "The President was lying on the road and bleeding and already shot, and they refused to continue to give him assistance. It was finally the family and an ambulance from our hospital that went and rescued the President when he was more than half-an-hour bleeding and losing a lot of blood. The United Nations Police didn't take action until the Portuguese Generale got there. That's one of the worst things that could happen to this country; have police from everywhere, everyone within one system and mostly looking after themselves than looking after the situation here." (full article)
Those are the days I am ashamed. Ashamed to say "I work for the UN"!
Pictures Die Burger and Chad Hanning (UNinvolved), WhatReallyHappened and Gamma Liaison (Belgian Peacekeepers).
Source: The Other World News Read the full post...
News: UN Peace Keeping in Darfur. A New UNStart?
link[i-link]A United Nations peacekeeping police officer, holds the babies handed to hear by two refugee women, while on patrol in the Abou Shouk refugee camp in North Darfur. The patrol was one of the first to re-enter Darfur's refugee camps since the United Nations took over peacekeeping in Darfur this month to try to end five years of violence. (full post)
I might sound largely cynical, but the way the UN Peace Keeping Operations works, with often a too limited mandate and an intrinsic bureaucracy, I would not be surprised if the same mothers would take a shot at the guy in the middle, one year from now. Mark my words.
Photo courtesy AP/Alfred de Montesquiou. Source: International Aid Workers Today
News: DRC UN Staff on Strike
link[i-link] E. points out that while yesterday we were discussing whether or not we, aid workers, are not paid too much, at the same time local staff working for the UN Peace Keeping forces in DRC (MONUC) went on strike.
Picture courtesy Myriam Asmani-MONUC