Robust Peacekeeping

From the New York Times:

U.N. Forces Using Tougher Tactics to Secure Peace
By MARC LACEY

NAIROBI, Kenya, May 22 - The United Nations, burdened by its inability to stave off the mass killings in Rwanda in 1994 and by failed missions in Bosnia and Somalia, is allowing its peacekeepers to mount some of the most aggressive operations in its history.

The change has been evolving over the last decade, as the Security Council has adopted the notion of "robust peacekeeping" and rejected the idea that the mere presence of blue-helmeted soldiers on the ground helps quell combat.

...A turning point came in 2000 after rebels in Sierra Leone killed some peacekeepers and took hundreds more hostage. The United Nations commissioned a review, headed by Lakhdar Brahimi, a former foreign minister of Algeria, which called for troops to be deployed more rapidly in peace enforcement operations. "No amount of good intentions can substitute for the fundamental ability to project credible force," the so-called Brahimi Report said.

...[N]owhere do war and peace seem as cloudy as in Congo, where peacekeepers received a beefed-up mandate from the Security Council in 2003 - and where at least one human rights group has complained of civilian casualties.

..."It may look like war but it's peacekeeping," said Lt. Gen. Babacar Gaye of Senegal, the force commander in Congo, of the largest and most robust of the 18 United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world.

When I hear "UN peacekeepers," I worry. I'm reminded of the reports of abuse perpetrated by the so-called peacekeepers.

On May 2, 2005, the Associated Press reported:

Stephane Dujarric said a preliminary investigation by the U.N. mission in Liberia indicated that some allegations against its personnel could be substantiated while others could not.

"The allegations range from the exchange of goods, money or services for sex to the sexual exploitation of minors. The peacekeeping department here in New York as well as the mission on the ground are taking appropriate follow-up action," he said.

A U.N. official speaking on condition of anonymity said the total number of allegations could eventually total 20. The official said four U.N. nations contributed to the Liberian mission but declined to name them.

...The allegations in Liberia are just the latest to be leveled against U.N. peacekeepers who have been accused of sexually abusing the very people they were sent to protect in missions from Bosnia and Kosovo to Cambodia, East Timor and Congo.

Bottomline: The United Nations is a mess.

The thought of "robust peacekeeping" is disquieting, given their sometimes robust, sexually abusive treatment of the people they are sent to protect.

I find the UN's decision to allow its peacekeepers to be more aggressive rather amusing. After all of that organization's pontificating and anti-American rhetoric, the Security Council admits that the mere presence of blue-helmeted soldiers in a trouled region isn't enough to get the job done.

"'It may look like war but it's peacekeeping,' said Lt. Gen. Babacar Gaye of Senegal, the force commander in Congo."

This is a textbook example of doublespeak, and completely in line with the UN's modus operandi.

I think the UN is in dire need of some robust reform and clarification of its purpose.

At present, it is little more than a corrupt, irrelevant body.