Types of Peacekeeping Missions - Essay Example

How important is local knowledge to the success of peacekeeping operations, and why Introduction The focal point of this paper is to analyze and understand the need of local knowledge and customs while ensuring peace in a certain region. We would identify the problems arising due to lack of local knowledge regarding geographical terrains, religious faith and social customs and try to incorporate logical conclusions or solutions to them. Peacekeeping has been a difficult endeavor for most countries in recent decades. Peacekeeping forces have been utilized in many locations for many different reasons, including keeping the peace, and ensuring distribution of supplies. This has been vividly realized in locations including Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq in recent years. Many countries, including the United States and others have had a hand in peacekeeping missions. The United Nations would be the guiding force for such peacekeeping missions in an effort to foster democratic peace worldwide. Operational law should be the governing force behind Peacekeeping Operations. One very important aspect of peacekeeping operations would be obtaining a clarified definition of the specific peacekeeping mission. A Peacekeeping Operation can often be described as any unilateral or multilateral intervention into the civil affairs of a foreign country designed to give a more secure and stable atmosphere, support constitutional processes, provide protection for citizens and facilitate repatriation processes for refugees. Peacekeeping operations also facilitate the capacity toward supporting provisional or interim governments and setting the stage for arrival of multinational forces. In this paper the first section deals with the various types of peacekeeping missions, the second section defines the term 'peacekeeping' and third section would specify the nature, cause and importance of local knowledge to the success of peacekeeping operations followed by a conclusion where the entire topic is summed up. Types of Peacekeeping Missions There in fact would be several different kinds of Peacekeeping Operations. These range from Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, or the Middle East. Not only do we have current peacekeeping missions but there are those that have been completed as well. Current peacekeeping missions include UNTSO in the Middle East, UNDOF in Golan Heights, UNIFIL in Lebanon, which are all in the Middle East. UNFICYP is in Cyprus, UNOMIG is in Georgia and UNMIK is in Kosovo and are considered European operations. UNMOGIP is in India-Pakistan, and MINUSTAH is in Haiti. All these are current peacekeeping operations. The completed missions of peacekeeping operations are as follows. UNTAET from East Timor, UNIKOM from Iraq-Kuwait, UNMOP from Croatia, UNMIBH from Bosnia Herzegovina. This information was found on the Bureau of International Organization Affairs website and updated as of 2006. Within each of these missions a framework of operations would have been either loosely or strictly adhered to. It would be the adaptation of these frameworks that would be of utmost importance. The frameworks allow for a further and better understanding of the locality involved in the peacekeeping mission. Research is done to ensure that the framework would contain enough capacity for upholding the entire peacekeeping mission. Sorenson and Wood (2004) in The Politics of Peacekeeping in the Post-Cold War Era written in 2004 wrote that when questioning the scope of a particular peacekeeping mission, decisions as to the feasibility for continuation of the peacekeeping mission should be considered. Scope and duration have become an issue in peacekeeping missions as a result (Sorenson and Wood, 2004: 129). This is where consideration for the actors in the decision-making process for peacekeeping operations would fall into place. Lawmakers amidst other government officials would quite often have some say in feasibility of peacekeeping missions along with duration and the number of forces to be included in the mission. Thakur and Thayer(1995) edited A Crisis of Expectations: UN Peacekeeping in the 1990's. Within this text would be a great deal of information in regard to the types of peacekeeping operations and how things may or may not go according to plan (Thakur & Thayer, 1995: 89). Lamb (2006) provides insight into the work in chapter 4 states that controversy surrounding sending peacekeepers into an area without a definite ceasefire would lead others to believe that the choice for intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina was unsuitable in those conditions (Lamb, 2006: 102). What are Peacekeeping Operations There are several methods in which to interpret peacekeeping and its operational use. The first person to use the word peacekeeping was UN Secretary General Dag Hammerskiold and this was in describing the first UN Emergency Force known as UNEFI. This force was sent to Sinai in 1956 so that Egypt and Israel might finally find agreement in ending the war between them. "In most cases, the purpose is to maintain and/or assist in the implementation of agreements (including a cease-fire) between previously warring states, or - especially during the last decade - factions engaged in violent conflict within a single state" (Oakley, 1998: 22). Peacekeeping has been a part of society for nearly six decades and yet, every peacekeeping operation fulfills a separate purpose. "Particularly during the past decade, peacekeeping operations have come to have important civilian components, including support for human rights, elections, disarmament, demobilization, demining, and assistance to civil administration - particularly law-enforcement - institutions as well as humanitarian operations, conducted by a variety of international and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), that require protection" (Oakley, 1998: 22). "Peacekeeping usually involves two phases: a combat or stabilization phase; and a post-conflict, nation re-building phase (It should be noted that many insurgencies also have two phases, at least according to much of the classic literature)" (O'Connor, 2006: 98-99). Peacekeeping would primarily be considered a military operation because the military is often the only agency with sufficient resources for the sometimes difficult and lengthy processes and procedures involved. "A civilian component may also be involved in periods of stabilization and reconstruction, but that depends upon what sort of "mission" the Department of State is willing to authorize for volunteers and NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations)"(O'Connor, 2006: 101-112). Soldiers who are assigned to peacekeeping operations typically wear distinctive insignia and helmets, e.g., U.N.-sponsored peacekeepers are readily distinguished by their blue helmets. The United States steadfastly maintains that its peacekeepers should have immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (Jaffe and Ricks, 2000). Many of the peacekeeping operations have names and purposes relative to the United Nations or NATO operations. The early origins of peacekeeping would have several good examples including the U.S. occupation of Haiti from 1915 to 1934. Modern peacekeeping would essentially be considered a post-Cold War phenomenon in which the U.S. acts in a specific role toward strengthening the deterrent effect of the U.N. or would in fact lend its weight as the last of the superpower nations toward a strengthened role for the U.N. and most recently, for NATO which is gearing up for the peacekeeping function.The UN states that peacekeeping is not identical to having one or more superpowers acting as the world's policemen. Specifically, the UN Charter reserves the right to engage in peacekeeping efforts for itself, and although there have been a few U.S. presidents to utilize the War Powers Act for unilateral military intervention, the more common path today is toward U.S. contribution, along with contribution from other nations, what military force the U.N. requires. Modern international peacekeeping operations seem to have been established around the year 1992 and since then the U.S. has taken on assignments in about seven countries, and the U.N., since its inception in 1948, has launched 56 such missions. Of these missions, thirteen are still active. The average US contribution of troops would be 6% unless there is a notable exception where there are vital interests or the war on terrorism is the focus. How important is local knowledge for successful peacekeeping operations Why Local knowledge is an imperative factor in order to manage successful peacekeeping operations. This has been recognized by successful peacekeeping operations and failures. Peacekeeping Failures seen as being the most prevalent exist in Kosovo, Somalia and Iraq as observed by many authors including Berdal and Caplan (2004) as seen in the very first sentence of The Politics of International Administration. "In the summer of 2003, as the mounting costs and difficulties facing U.S. and British forces in Iraq became ever more apparent, ministers and officials responded to growing international criticism by invoking a plea: the challenge of administrating postwar Iraq following the collapse of Saddam Hussein's odious regime was so unique, so wholly different from what had gone on elsewhere and before, that no amount of prewar planning could have prepared them adequately for the realities now confronting troops and civilian administrators in that vast, inhospitable, and war-torn country. More time was needed before judgment could be passed" (Berdal & Caplan, 2004: 14). "The period since the early 1990s has witnessed an extraordinary, though still understudied, phenomenon in international relations: a growing willingness on the part of the international community to entrust the United Nations and other international organizations with the authority to govern and administer, on an interim basis, war-torn and contested territories. In Eastern Slavonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and East Timor--all covered in detail in this special issue--the responsibilities assumed by external actors have been so extensive as to warrant the politically and historically sensitive labels of trusteeship and protectorate" (Berdal & Caplan, 2004: 14). This epitomizes the efforts of modern peacekeeping and reveals how peacekeeping operations have evolved over fifty years to the point where nations are now cooperating under United Nations operational mandates involving peacekeeping operations in locations like Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan. Kofi Annan (2002) considers democracy an international issue, "Where domestic peace has broken down, the international community must be able to assist in its restoration" (Annan, 2002). There have been many pieces written in regard to the peacekeeping efforts in Kosovo. Mertus(2002) states that "Peacebuilding requires the efforts of a host of civilian actors focused on institution building, interpersonal reconciliation, and social transformation over the long term" (Mertus,2002: 21). This alone reveals the vital importance that local knowledge provides peacekeeping provision. Sorenson and Wood have brought into focus specific peacekeeping missions including Somalia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sorenson and Wood also bring up points to ponder for future peacekeeping missions. In regard to Somalia, "The military initially under-estimated the situation in Somalia: 'The Pentagon official described the two clan leaders as "intimidated" by the imminent arrival of US troops and noted that the United States is generally well respected in Somalia'" (Sorenson & Wood, 2004: 141). In this case, the perception was an erroneous one as UN peacekeepers were continually and increasingly caught in the rival militias' crossfire along with that of armed gangs. As a result of a televised that cost the lives of eighteen American soldiers the US pulled their forces out of Somalia. Sorenson and Wood (2004) also discuss Bosnia and Herzegovina and the peacekeeping mission there. They discuss how during the peacekeeping mission many conditions were not always in the best interest of the US. "Under the Clinton Administration, the US contributed over 4,000 troops to UNMIBH, but the Bush II Administration reduced the commitment by 1,000 troops in March 2001 in one of its first foreign policy actions. A year and a half later, the Bush Administration threatened to veto a six-month extension of the UN mission itself because the Security Council refused to grant immunity from the new International Criminal Court (ICC) to the remaining American forces serving in Bosnia. 16 The US later relented, and agreed to maintain its troops in Bosnia, while expressing strong reservations about the ICC, but the action indicated a US willingness to veto UN support of an entire UN peacekeeping mission in order to protect its own interests" (Sorenson & Wood, 2004: 118). This proves to be a significant aspect of modern peacekeeping initiatives and again changed the face of peacekeeping. The reason for this includes the fact that the lack of local knowledge cost lives, far too many lives, especially in the eyes of the George W. Bush administration as a result of the ambush. This perspective influences international peacekeeping to a much more than marginal degree. An interesting focus on modern day peacekeeping would be the development of frameworks for peacekeeping missions. This framework allows for more global effort in peacekeeping, and allows for the important factor of local knowledge to be included and inclusive in the planning of these peacekeeping missions. In many cases there would be domestic politics of peacekeeping. Sorenson and Wood (2004) would have an interesting viewpoint in this aspect of peacekeeping. They state that "To accept the 'strategic objectives' reasoning for peacekeeping decisions, one must accept the argument that military commitments stem from the calculus of national interests, and a fit between such interests and the means employed to secure them" (Sorenson & Wood, 2004: 119). The authors continue into the subject of peacekeeping efforts stating that policy makers tend to shape the motives underlying peacekeeping commitments. Manwaring and Joes (2000) have a very good indication in regard to peacekeeping operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Somalia. They state that the peace force commander has three aspects to consider: 1, Peace forces have no power to detain or try the members of opposing forces or other individuals that may pose a security risk to the nation or the intervention force or even toward common criminals. 2, There would be no authority to regulate any aspects of civil life for the good of the entire local population. 3, There would be no privileged combatant status for protection of the members of intervention forces who may be captured, wounded or killed. Legitimacy in peacekeeping operations has a great deal of influence on the writing of this text. Legitimacy would also have an aspect toward local knowledge in the peacekeeping process. Local knowledge is not only an imperative aspect for peacekeeping missions, it would also be imperative toward ensuring that peacekeeping frameworks can be maintained. Yet, this framework is only the beginning, without deeply rooted legitimacy some of the local aspects of peacekeeping operations can often be overlooked or ignored. "On whose behalf is the intervention conducted" (Manwaring & Joes, 2000: 41-53). Yet again, the aspect of locality and the knowledge of that locality would come into play. Understanding of not just the terrain, but the culture, the religious taboos, the political and ethnic landscape would provide a great deal of benefit in all peacekeeping efforts. The peacekeeping effort in Somalia failed for many reasons. Only some of those would be the fact that we as UN led peacekeeping forces, had no true knowledge of impact on the culture, the civil unrest or the conflict itself. The devastation involved in the starvation of the citizens of Somalia brought UN forces into the situation for relief purposes, yet the opposite occurred due to the lack of foreknowledge in the locality, the culture and the methods of those who proved to be mercenaries and guerillas in many shapes and forms (Mukherjee, 2004: 42). Significant considerations toward the monetary cost of peacekeeping operations must also be taken into accounting when developing the framework of peacekeeping operations. This also would involve intimate understanding of the local knowledge gained through various methods and should be reflected in the number and types of troops utilized in deployment for peacekeeping missions. Several of these missions included risk and cost assessments both before and after the peacekeeping mission. The U.S. Department of Defense Congressional Research Service and the General Accounting Office provide a great deal of this information as noted Military Exploits (Jaffe & Ricks, 2000). The information for some significant peacekeeping missions includes: Somalia: Dec. 9, 1992 -- March 3, 1995 Operations Restore Hope, Continue Hope and others. U.S. troops lead a U.N.-backed famine-relief mission as warring factions fight for control. Maximum U.S. troop strength . . . 25,800 U.S. casualties . . . . . . . . . 43 dead, 153 wounded Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.7 billion Bosnia and Macedonia: Feb. 28, 1993 - present Operations Deny Flight, Provide Promise, Deliberate Force, Decisive Edge, Joint Endeavor and others. U.S. troops lead NATO and U.N. efforts to halt Serbian aggression against Muslims and others in former Yugoslavia, to provide humanitarian assistance and to enforce peace agreements. Maximum U.S. troop strength . . . . 32,000 Reserves activated . . . . . . . . 17,000 U.S. casualties . . . . . . . . . 4 dead, 5 wounded Allied sorties . . . . . . . . . . 100,000+ Cruise missiles . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $9.7 billion Afghanistan and Sudan: Aug. 20, 1998 Operation Infinite Reach: U.S. bombs camps and facilities allegedly used by Osama bin Laden for terrorist attacks in retaliation for blowing up U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Cruise missiles . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50 million+ Kosovo: March 24, 1999 - present Operations Allied Force, Noble Anvil, Shining Hope and Falcon: U.S. and NATO forces wage an air war against Serbian-led government in Yugoslovia to halt repression of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. U.S. troops also participate in relief operations and peacekeeping mission. Maximum U.S. troop strength . . . . . 38,601 Reserves activated . . . . . . . . . . 5,656 U.S. casualties . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 dead Allied combat sorties . . . . . . . . 9,000+ Total allied bombs . . . . . . . . . 23,000 Cruise missiles . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 Cost . . . . . . . . . about $5 billion appropriated Sources for this information include: The Department of Defense, the Congressional Research Service and the General Accounting Office, press accounts and three nonprofit groups: the Center for Defense Information, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Affairs and the Federation of American Scientists. Cost estimates came from figures supplied by the CDI, the CSBA and the GAO (Jaffe & Ricks, 2000). It would be assured that had there been more local knowledge during any one of these peacekeeping missions the losses and costs would have been different. This is the reason to have frameworks in the development of peacekeeping missions. Since the incidents in Rwanda, Somalia and other locations, the development of frameworks inclusive of local knowledge have become integral to these peacekeeping missions. Though currently, even Bosnia-Herzegovina, Afghanistan and Iraq would be questionable in the success of the operations, this reveals how further local knowledge would be of benefit to the peacekeeping(Podolski, 2006: 223). Peacekeeping requires framework and a comprehensive knowledge of the locality including the culture, the terrain, the business practices, and much more. Without such knowledge, the success of peacekeeping missions can be difficult to find. This has been seen in the conflicts involving peacekeeping missions that occurred in Somalia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Afghanistan and Iraq. (Border, 2002: 229-230) Understanding the benefits and the limitations of peacekeeping would be of the utmost importance along with the knowledge of locality. Without these three factors, there are outside interferences and influences that can inhibit and prohibit peacekeeping efforts. (Lamb, 2004: 39) Conclusion Ultimately, it should be noted that, it should be the prime concern of the authorities to train the personnel into the perfect mode of mental structure to blend into the different variance of social criteria on the field of operation. As mentioned in this paper it has been proved time and again that misconception of local custom and social structure could result into a multi strata related failure of an otherwise well organized format planning. The difference in socio-economic structure, especially economic difference ultimately lead into a world of difference which in correspondence lead into lose of faith with the peacekeepers ruining the basic goal of the operation. (Fletcher, 2003: 181) It should also be added that a difference in religious belief could also turn an otherwise successful operation into a complete failure. Peacekeepers involved in the service maintaining proper, just and peaceful governance should be kept well informed about these local customs other than possessing complete knowledge about the geographical terrains of the region. For example, if a soldier is unaware of the fact that while moving into a mosque one should open his shoes outside the mosque then, there is quite a good chance that he and his entire team would certainly loose assistance from the local population in future as they would identify the act of entering into a mosque with shoes as an act of sacrilege. As the assistance of the local population is extremely vital for the peacekeeper's success it is necessary to be aware of such customs as this. Bibliography Do you know the publisher placeyou only wrote the name of publishe. I couldn't find O'connar 2004 in the text, so I deleted it. Is it ok Lamb, S, R. (2006). 'Justifications in International Politics', (Curtley-Vosges). Oakley, R, B. (1998). 'Peacekeeping; US Foreign Policy Agenda', Vol. 3, (Alliance Publishers); April 1998: 22. (See also)Oakley, Robert B. (1998). 'Peacekeeping; US Foreign Policy Agenda', Vol. 3, April 1998: 22, retrieved at http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0498/ijpe/ijpe0498.pdf accessed on 27, June, 2006. O'Connor, T. (2006). 'Peacekeeping: A Historical Brief', (National Book Trust). Berdal, M., & Caplan, R. (2004). 'The Politics of International Administration. Global Governance', (Chatterjee and Chakrabarty). Mertus, J. (2004).'Improving International Peacebuilding Efforts: The Example of Human Rights Culture in Kosovo', (Chatterjee and Charabarty). Podolski, V. (2006). 'Causes and Results of Needs', (BTM Publishers). Fletcher, R. (2003). 'On International Politics', (Howard & Price). Border, S; 2002; 'Asia on Fire', (National Book Trust). Mukherjee, S, D. (2004). 'Chatting Politics- Spitting Hate', (IBL & Alliance Ltd). Lamb, D. (2004). 'Cult to Culture: The Development of Civilization on the Strategic Strata',(National Book Trust). Jaffe, G & Ricks, T, E. (2000) 'Military Exploits: of Men and Money, and How the Pentagon Often Wastes Both', September 22, 1999, The Wall Street Journal, The Pulitzer Prize Winners; National Reporting,accessed on 1, July, 2006, retrieved at http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2000/national-reporting/works/military_exploits.htm Annan, K. A. (2002); 'Democracy as an International Issue', Global Governance, 8(2): 135+, July 17, 2006, from Questia database: retrieved at http://www.questia.com/PM.qsta=o&d=5000769054 accessed on 27, June, 2006. Sorenson, D. S. & Wood, P. C. (2004). 'The Politics of Peacekeeping in the Post-Cold War Era', (National Book Trust). Manwaring, M. G. & Joes, A. J. (2000). 'Beyond Declaring Victory and ComingHome: TheChallenges of Peace and Stability Operations', (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers), Retrieved July 19, 2006, from Questia database: chapter 3: 41-53. http://www.questia.com/PM.qsta=o&d=22878825 accessed on 8, July, 2006. Thakur, R. & Thayer, C, A. (1995). 'A Crisis of Expectations: UN Peacekeeping in the 1990s', (Alliance Books). Can you cut out some words, because of words lomited Read More