|
Conceptual issues
- The first day of the Seminar was devoted
to a discussion of the recent evolution of the
concept of peacekeeping, such as the development of
the role of peacekeeping and its relationship to
crisis management and a reassessment of new tasks,
including the growing importance of the civil-
military interface in peacekeeping operations.
- It was stressed that the evolution of
peacekeeping concepts has been driven by practical
experience and was, some would say, 'forced change'.
There has not only been an increase in the number of
peacekeeping operations, but also a rapid growth of
variety in functions and tasks. The UN
Representative pointed out that the rapid evolution
of peacekeeping functions and practice has preceded
its conceptualisation; accordingly, no new UN
peacekeeping doctrine underpins UN actions in this
field. Although there are still so-called
'traditional' peacekeeping operations involving
lightly-armed forces operating with the consent of
parties to the conflict, an increasing number of
operations can be labelled multi-functional or
multi-dimensional. Such operations, which still
involve military tasks, encompass a variety of
functions, e.g. preventive deployment, disarmament
and demobilisation of forces, protection and
delivery of humanitarian aid, restoration of public
order and many other civilian tasks such as
humanitarian rights monitoring and facilitating the
return of refugees. A distinction could be made
between multi-functional operations, based on an
agreed settlement (e.g. Cambodia, Namibia), with
limited duration and a great chance of success, and
multi-functional operations where such an agreement
is lacking (Somalia, former Yugoslavia), with
undetermined duration, greater need to use force and
less chance of early success. A particularly
difficult scenario involves questions in the so-called "failed states" where one of the objectives
of the peacekeeping mission can be the restoration
of the state authority. Such questions have unique
features and require handling on an ad hoc basis.
- The growing "grey area" of more complex
multi-functional peacekeeping operations referred to
in a number of presentations sets a requirement for
clear and timely decision-making. Early involvement
in a crisis is of utmost importance to prevent waste
of time and resources. Early coordination between
international organisations involved in a
peacekeeping operation and nations taking part in it
is essential to avoid duplications and to ensure
cost-effectiveness. Participants underscored that
the UN tends to call more on regional organisations
for carrying out UN mandated peacekeeping
operations. This requires further coordination and
rationalisation of their activities as well as their
modus operandi. In this context the important role
of the CSCE in early-warning and conflict prevention
was highlighted. Attention was drawn to the CSCE's
status as a UN Charter-Chapter VIII organization,
which under the terms of the Helsinki Final Document
1992 may mandate peacekeeping operations. Although
this has not taken place so far, there is a growing
chance that the CSCE might take such a decision in
the near future, e.g. regarding a multi-national
peacekeeping operation in Nagorno-Karabakh.
- The multi-dimensional aspect of new
peacekeeping operations also requires a significant
increase and diversification in both military and
civilian tasks, with consequent implications for
training. The military-civilian interface becomes
more important, in particular as the number of
humanitarian organisations involved in peacekeeping
expands. For the more complex multi-functional
peacekeeping operations it becomes all the more
important to have staff procedures and organisation
that can be easily understood by personnel from all
participating nations and organisations.
- Many speakers noted that more assertive or
robust use of force is increasingly needed in
peacekeeping operations, both under Chapter VI and
Chapter VII of the UN Charter. In particular,
according to some delegations, the concept of
anticipatory self-defense involving greater use of
force could find application at the operational
level to justify offensive action, that would be
covered by Article 40 of the Charter (Chapter VII).
The UN Representative also referred to "second
generation" peacekeeping questions, where a more
robust use of force does not, however, result in
crossing the threshold between Chapter VI and
Chapter VII. Against this background a discussion
took place on principles and criteria set out in the
Athens Report. With regard to the concept of
impartiality, various participants stressed that it
was not synonymous to neutrality. Impartiality at
the strategic/political level remains key, but
application of the principle of impartiality at a
tactical level should not justify inaction by the
peacekeeping force in case a party is acting in a
way contrary to the mandate and objectives of an
operation. On the other hand, such action by the
peacekeeping force might be interpreted by the party
concerned as partiality. Therefore, in practice
strict application of impartiality might prove to be
difficult. Similar considerations apply to the
principle of consent which should obviously exist
for mounting the operation, but should not be
necessarily sought for every single initiative on
the ground, since this might result in the
impossibility for the peacekeeping force to operate
effectively in carrying out its mandate.
- Although the peacekeeping concept has
developed significantly since June 1993, it was felt
that the definitions of the Athens Report were still
generally valid. However, there might be a need to
elaborate them further to reflect the newly emerging
aspects of current peacekeeping. Several nations
presented their national peacekeeping doctrines; as
a result, the need was felt to address this matter
in further detail and to try to develop a common
ground. It was also stressed that there is a need
for developing a separate concept, principles and
conditions/criteria for peace enforcement operations
as distinct from peacekeeping.
Experience Gathered So Far
- The second major theme of the Seminar was
the experience gained so far by organisations or
institutions in carrying out multilateral crisis
management and peacekeeping activities, and the need
for further harmonisation of activities in this
area. Much of the discussion on this topic on the
second and third days of the Seminar naturally
focused on the experiences gained in the former
Yugoslavia, the working relationships developed as a
result of that experience, and areas where there was
need for further work.
- A view expressed by a number of Seminar
participants was that the approach of European
institutions to peacekeeping was evolving, with the
CSCE, EU and WEU all examining new ways to deal with
situations requiring peacekeeping. Relationships
between the various regional and international
organizations involved in peacekeeping were also
changing as the UN and its agencies began to work
more closely with other regional and non-
governmental organisations on peacekeeping. In the
past, crisis management structures had been
established to deal primarily with aggression in the
context of collective defense, as was the case with
NATO. The events in former Yugoslavia caught
virtually all European institutions unprepared and,
as a result, these institutions are now working
towards new approaches and principles that would
permit them to respond quickly and effectively to
future crises. Crises, seminar participants noted,
are more frequently political in nature, and now
require increased use of diplomatic and political
means, as well as military ones, to contain and
manage.
- Another topic frequently raised in
connection with appropriate responses to crises such
as that in Yugoslavia related to the mandate given
to peacekeepers. Participants agreed that only the
UN or the CSCE could provide mandates for
peacekeeping operations. There was general
agreement that, ideally, mandates should reflect a
clear political goal and strategic vision, and be
well-informed by reporting from the field. In
practice, however, this had proven hard to achieve,
and in fact the process of creating a mandate could
become an iterative one growing out of dozens of
Security Council resolutions, as it has been the
case with the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. A
broad and flexible mandate, while useful from an
operational point of view, could work against the
objective of a clear goal.
- Related to the issue of a clear mandate
was the issue of unity of command. A number of
speakers said that peacekeeping operations should
have one commander -- in charge of all military,
humanitarian, and other components of the operation
-- reporting directly to the political authorities
of the mandating organization. This unity of
command would permit close coordination and avoid
duplication of effort or, worse, effort at cross-purposes. Contributing nations need to send well-
trained and well-equipped troops with some
familiarity with local culture, and not second-guess
the decisions of the commander on the ground. One
presentation noted that, in practice, the success of
Operation Deny Flight seemed to suggest that unity
of effort could be to a certain extent a substitute
(although not an ideal one) for unity of command.
- A common theme that emerged from
presentations was the need for close coordination
and cooperation between all elements of a
peacekeeping operation. Good communications among
all parties is crucial, and can be facilitated by
regular meetings and staff exchanges and through the
use of liaison officers. Training of military and
civilian personnel to understand each other's
perspectives and methods of operation is useful in
this regard, although during periods of crisis there
are practical difficulties in arranging training for
staff who are often urgently needed elsewhere.
- Another important lesson learned was the
need for an effective information strategy. The
objectives of such a strategy would include:
informing and gaining support and consent of the
local population, maintaining public support in
troop contributing nations, and the establishment of
good relations with the media in the theatre.
|