|
|
|
|
CIAO DATE: 12/99
Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers
Summary of Proceedings
Aberfoyle House, Magee College, University of Ulster
13–15 June 1996
Table of Contents
INCORE hosted a major conference on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers at its headquarters on 13-15 June 1996. The conference drew a wide audience of peacekeepers, policymakers, NGO representatives, academics and young researchers as well as a range of people actively involved in the training and preparation of peacekeepers. Among those to address the conference were two former commanders of the UNPROFOR operation in the Former Yugoslavia; Lt Gen Satish Nambiar (Retd) of the Indian Defence Forces and Lt Gen Lars-Eric Wahlgren (Retd) of the Swedish Army. The conference was preceded by the formal launch of INCORE at its new headquarters, Aberfoyle House, adjacent to the University of Ulster’s Magee Campus. Lt General Nambiar performed this ceremony.
The conference coincided with the launch of the report of a research project on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers. The report was the result of a collaborative project between INCORE, the University of Limerick and the Austrian Study Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution. The report’s authors (Professor Edward Moxon-Browne and Claus Heje from the University of Limerick and Arno Truger and Andrea Haberl-Zemljic from the International Civilian Peacekeeping and Peace-Building Program at the Austrian Study Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution) introduced their respective sections of the report and effectively set the scene for the conference’s concentration of training and preparation issues. The Executive Summary of the report is included in this Occasional Paper.
The current nature and strategic implications of many of the issues raised in the conference, both in the papers presented and in the general discussion they stimulated, has prompted INCORE to summarise the conference proceedings in the form of an Occasional Paper. Each individual contribution can stand on its own merits, but taken together, they provide a useful snapshot of the state of peacekeeping at a time when this concept is being critically evaluated by many governments, military establishments and NGOs around the world. One theme which was constantly referred to was the contribution which countries new to peacekeeping are making and will make in the future to international security, and additionally the problems they face in defining and developing their role. Since 1989, at least 49 states have begun to contribute to peacekeeping operations. Another recurring issue throughout the conference was the delicate interface between military and civilian peacekeepers. Many speakers felt that military peacekeepers did not appreciate the contribution which civilian peacekeepers had to make to PKOs. The role of the media in peacekeeping was also raised by a number of conference participants. Some participants pointed out the need for UN PKOs to use the local media much more effectively in their attempts to communicate with the local population. The increasing intrusiveness of the international media was mentioned by a number of conference speakers with command experience of peacekeeping operations. They felt that greater co-ordination between peacekeepers on the ground and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations in New York was essential, particularly with regard to handling relations with the media.
The conference was divided into four sessions. The first, introductory, session examined the changing nature of peacekeeping. It was chaired by an experienced peacekeeper, Brigadier TS Shergill, of the Indian Defence Forces, and addressed by two leading academic commentators on peacekeeping; Professor Alan James of the University of Keele and Dr Tom Woodhouse, Director of the Centre for Conflict Resolution at the University of Bradford. This session also included a paper from Lt Col Colm Doyle, from the Irish Army who served as Lord Carrington’s special representative in Bosnia in 1992 and had a unique insight into the collapse of Yugoslavia and subsequent international peace efforts.
The conference’s second session examined the training and preparation of military peacekeepers and was chaired by Dr Stephen Ryan, Senior Lecturer at the University of Ulster. The first speaker in this session was Claus Heje, who introduced the military section of the report on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers. It was also addressed by Lt Gen Satish Nambiar and Lt Gen Wahlgren who examined peacekeeping from the perspectives of the developing and developed worlds respectively. Lt Gen Nambiar argued that ‘there are many countries from the “developing world” who can more than match the training and preparation of peacekeepers from some of the countries in the developed world.’ Among the points made by Lt Gen Wahlgren was the need for equipment to be specifically designed for peacekeeping purposes, for example de-mining. He also concluded that three essential elements are required to successfully support a peacekeeping operation: ‘training, training and training.’ Session two was also addressed by Lt Col Oliver Macdonald, the senior instructor at the United Nations Training School Ireland (UNTSI), who outlined the essentials of an actual training course given to military peacekeepers in Ireland. Dr Greg Tillett, from the University of Western Sydney, based his presentation on his work with members of the Australian Defence Forces. He has been involved in establishing a standard framework for training in conflict resolution for Australian soldiers about to go on peacekeeping missions. He stressed that peacekeepers were likely to encounter different types conflict at the pre-departure and post-return stages of deployment, as well as on mission, and must be prepared to deal with them. Session two was also addressed by Frederick Barron, from the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (IDASA), who outlined steps being taken in Southern Africa to organise a comprehensive and regional approach to peacekeeper training. Among the points he made was South Africa’s wish to establish itself as a regional training centre for peacekeeping.
Session three of the conference concentrated on the training and preparation of civilian peacekeepers. It was chaired by Momoyo Ise, Director of the Specialist Services Division in the Office of Human Resources Management at UNHQ, New York. Arno Truger, Director of the International Civilian Peacekeeping and Peace-Building Training Program (IPT) at the Austrian Study Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution introduced the civilian section of the report on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers. The session was addressed by OP Rathor, a police adviser with the DPKO who examined training issues involved with CIVPOL personnel. Among the points made by Mr Rathor was that perhaps the most important role performed by CIVPOL officers was their training of the police force in the host country and how structures need to be put in place to measure the effectiveness of such training. Fabrizio Pagani, from the University of Pisa’s new Civilian Peacekeeping Program, concentrated on the selection and recruitment procedures for civilian peacekeepers, and suggested the need for a more precise functional categorisation of civilian personnel. Finally, session three was addressed by Jean-Michel Monod from the International Committee of the Red Cross who examined the applicability of International Humanitarian Law to UNPKOs.
An open ended session on possible future research areas, chaired by INCORE’s research director, Professor Valerie Morgan, concluded the conference. A number of issues were raised during this session, including methodological problems associated with the conduct of research into peacekeeping and the problems of funding. A number of themes which had recurred throughout the conference, such as the civilian-military interface and the role of media, were also discussed as possible future research areas.
Executive Summary of INCORE Report on: The Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers
Post-Cold War conflicts and threats to international security are becoming increasingly complex and demand ever more elaborate peacekeeping operations from the United Nations. Rather than simply keeping the warring parties apart, PKOs increasingly need pre-conflict preventive and post-conflict peace-building elements. The new demands being made on PKOs call for greater attention to be paid to the training and preparation of peacekeepers (both civilian and military) and to the widening range of ancillary support functions essential for the success of a peacekeeping mission.
INCORE was asked by the United Nations University to examine the issues related to the training and preparation of UN peacekeepers (military and civilian), and report back with recommended improvements for peacekeeper training. Crucially, the recommendations are based on the opinions and experiences of peacekeepers themselves. Those actually charged with implementing UN mandates on the ground, and who risk their lives for the mandates, often express the view that their voices are unheard. This report is based on the vast body of experience which has been accumulated by peacekeepers.
The part of the project relating to military peacekeeping draws on the experiences of Sweden and Ireland: countries with a long history of contributions to UN PKOs. Both Sweden and Ireland have contributed to the development of norms associated with ‘good peacekeeping’, and have also concerned themselves with the question of how the training of peacekeepers can be improved. During detailed interviews, peacekeepers from both countries were asked about their motives for joining peacekeeping operations, their views on the training and preparation they received, their reflections on their peacekeeping experience, and their suggestions for the improvement of training and peacekeeping. The interviews resulted in a frank and honest overview of contemporary peacekeeping. The interviewees pointed towards the need for specific peacekeeper training in addition to regular military training. They also raised a number of issues salient to the future shape of UN peacekeeping in general such as the confused interface between civilian and military peacekeepers, and tensions between peacekeepers of different nationalities.
Civilian peacekeepers are often drawn from diverse backgrounds. Furthermore, they are often entrusted with a wide range of tasks and perform their duties alone or as part of ad hoc units. As a result, the training and preparation of civilian peacekeepers raises a number of specific problems such as the location of the training, the frequent need for a pool of trained civilian personnel, and the relevance of the training to a particular mission. The Austrian based ‘International Civilian Peacekeeping and Peace-building Training Program’ (IPT) adopts a comprehensive approach to the training of civilian peacekeepers and also offers a unique opportunity to study civilian training. A questionnaire targeted at individuals who had completed the IPT programme helped frame recommendations for improvements in the training and preparation of civilian peacekeepers.
The central message of the military part of the report is the importance of a holistic approach to the training of peacekeepers; all personnel, regardless of rank and function on a PKO, must receive specific training. Normal military training is not enough. Contact skills are of particular importance. The establishment of comprehensive and long-term support services for peacekeepers and their families are also deemed essential, particularly given the stressful nature of many of the activities associated with modern PKOs. As the training of peacekeepers currently varies from country to country, common standards of preparation would enhance the cohesion and effectiveness of all PKOs. It is strongly recommended that personnel from one country participate in the training programmes of other countries. A centralisation of the preparation of peacekeepers for a particular mission is also important to avoid problems of poor co-ordination at the moment of deployment.
The study of the training and preparation of civilian peacekeepers points to the need for comprehensive and standardised training programmes that take account of the requirements of modern multi-dimensional PKOs. Co-ordination between concerned training institutions should be developed—possibly by way of a global database—in order to build up a pool of trained civilian personnel. Selection procedures should also become more sophisticated, to emphasise the quality of the personnel and their suitability for a particular mission. The training programmes themselves should pay increasing attention to the substantive functions to be carried out in the field; normal professional training and experience is insufficient and must be complemented by mission and function specific training.
Conference Paper Summaries
Session One: The Changing Nature of Peacekeeping
Session One, Paper One: The Changing Nature of Peacekeeping: Its Implications for the Training of Peacekeepers
Professor Alan James
University of Keele
The paper opened with a reservation as to whether the essence of peacekeeping has changed.
It was then suggested that training for the activity may be seen as falling, broadly speaking, into three categories: basic; contingency; and mission.
With regard to the training of military peacekeepers, it was asserted that there is now a case for basic military education and training at all levels to include peacekeeping, given that it can no longer be assumed that external military operations are solely concerned with fighting. Such training should include material on the nature of peacekeeping, and on its history, potential, problems, and limitations.
Contingency training—for those who are likely to be sent on peacekeeping missions—was thought to be, in an ideal world, very desirable.
Given that every peacekeeping mission is unique, it was argued as axiomatic that training for each specific mission is of highest importance—not just on the immediate military tasks but on the cultural and political context of the operation.
Training was also thought desirable for civilian peacekeepers. But there is no problem here over the ‘decontamination’ of military virtues, and the concept of peacekeeping is not unakin to normal civilian values and activities, basic training is less important for the military.
It was also suggested that it would be valuable for relevant civilians to undergo contingency training—but noted that there is no established civilian cadre there to be trained. However, mission training is very highly desirable.
The paper concluded with a number of questions for discussion and research. Among the former, it was asked whether the current focus in military training is perhaps too much on contingency training, and too little on the other two types of possible training.
Session One, Paper Two: Terra incognita: Here Be Dragons Peacekeeping and conflict resolution in contemporary conflict: some relationships considered
Dr Tom Woodhouse and Dr Oliver Ramsbotham
Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford
The paper by Woodhouse and Ramsbotham considers how analysts have assessed and defined the changing nature of peacekeeping, as confrontation with the dragons of post-Cold War conflict, particularly in Bosnia, Somalia, Rwanda, Angola, and Liberia, has forced rapid re-evaluation of what it is realistic to expect of peacekeeping deployments. Peacekeeping, as it has operated since 1988, is described and analysed within the context of changing ideas of humanitarian intervention. In this paper it is argued that peacekeeping provides the best available means for the international community if it seeks to have a capability to apply minimum standards of international humanitarian law and if it seeks to have a role in alleviating human suffering in violent conflicts. This argument is counterposed to those who claim that peacekeeping is not designed for intervention in civil wars and has proved at best ineffective, at worst harmful. Here, Woodhouse and Ramsbotham suggest that there are no easy solutions and ask the question, ‘what is it about contemporary conflicts that makes them so difficult to resolve? Is it possible that a clear analysis of conflict aetiology might point to policies whereby humanitarian intervention might be better linked to resolution processes, and where the role of peacekeeping can be realistically assessed?’
Drawing on work in the academic field of conflict resolution and conflict analysis, they offer the term international social conflict as a description of the type of conflict which is becoming prevalent in the post-cold war period: these international social conflicts do not respond well to traditional methods of inter-state management largely because they combine elements both of inter-state conflict and deep domestic divisions. They have both structural and relational dimensions and produce complex conflict generated humanitarian emergencies. The consequences are large numbers of refugees and internally displaced people, and large scale suffering from the effects of war, famine and social dislocation. The existing international humanitarian system has been strained to the limit, and military peacekeeping forces operating under UN mandates have been increasingly involved in providing assistance and protection for a wide range of agencies working to alleviate suffering in war zones. They argue that the traditional concept of humanitarian intervention (forcible action by states across international borders to protect human rights) is no longer adequate to respond to contemporary problems and offer a new and broader concept of non-forcible humanitarian intervention, which combines the actions of military peacekeepers, official aid and assistance by governments, and the actions of transnational, intergovernmental and non-intergovernmental organisations in areas of conflict. UN peacekeeping is a vital component of this broader concept, though its efficacy has been contested.
Nevertheless Ramsbotham and Woodhouse argue that if the international community is to retain the option of deploying modes of non-forcible humanitarian intervention, then peacekeeping must be reformed and strengthened. They conclude with a summary of the ways in which conflict and conflict resolution theory has approached the challenge of the conquest of violent conflict, and suggest that peacekeeping and conflict resolution are preoccupied with the same problems, that they are beginning to use the same analyses and vocabularies and that there are areas of work based in academic conflict resolution which are of relevance for refining the techniques and processes of peacekeeping.
Session One, Paper Three: The Yugoslav Experience—A Perspective
Lt Col Colm Doyle
Irish Army
Lt Col Doyle in his presentation listed examples of the wide variety of tasks undertaken by the United Nations Force UNPROFOR in the Former Yugoslavia during its deployment there. These examples are listed in order to demonstrate how diversified UN peacekeeping missions have become since the late 1980s. Other examples of the changing nature of peacekeeping missions are those of Cambodia, Namibia, Somalia and Macedonia. The mulitiplicity of these operations (election monitoring, UN policing, human rights abuses, refugee specialists, humanitarian tasks) requires close liaison between the UN agencies and the other ‘ players’ as well as the education and training of peacekeepers. The need for a single chain of command between the UN and the regional organisations is another factor which requires to be addressed.
He argues that despite criticism of the UN mission in the Former Yugoslavia from many quarters it was largely a successful operation given the limits of its mandates and its lack of adequate resources to do the job. UNPROFOR showed how vulnerable the UN peacekeeper can be where many were deliberately targeted and over 300 were killed. A lesson from Bosnia is that peacekeeping today requires a new breed of soldier—better trained, motivated, equipped and supported.
Conference Paper Summaries
Session Two: The Training and Preparation of Military Peacekeepers
Session Two, Paper One: The Training and Preparation of Military Peacekeepers
Lt Gen Wahlgren (Retd)
Swedish Army
I will base my comments on the training and preparation of military peacekeepers (particularly from developed countries) based on my six years with UN troops, five of them as Force Commander and Head of Mission in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and exYugoslavia (UNPROFOR).
Selection of personnel
The first criterion to consider is the selection of good candidates for peacekeeping from military units. A UN soldier should be well prepared and be able to interchange their normal military performance and peacekeeping performances at short notice. Thus he or she must be a very good soldier by profession but also have the flexibility to act as a peacekeeper.
Peacekeeping will present the soldier with a hugely varied range of experiences which he or she is unlikely to have experienced in the course of their routine military activities. In peace-keeping no situation is like the other. The soldier must understand and have the knowledge to evaluate the threat of an advancing unit, incoming fire etc.
The selected persons must have a good family relationship—if you have problems at home, they will be enlarged when you are abroad.
The soldier must understand the spirit of United Nations. We used to say, you can train a motivated young man to be a good soldier, but all good soldiers cannot be good peacekeepers.
Training
To Observe, Report and React in a correct manner way are the basic requirements.
To be informed by vision, by sound and by light, making more use of sophisticated equipment in the future.
To co-ordinate, evaluate and distribute all incoming information will require a sophisticated computer-supported system in the future. The system should be able to report confirmed facts as fast as in media systems.
With this information available, the peacekeeper must be able to react properly to all contingencies without mistakes. This means he must have passed a proper period of training. The goal with the training will be to train the soldiers to make estimates why he should take action and then during the exercises give him a number of examples how he might perform.
The use of force in a PK operation is laid down by the Secretary General saying: “Self-defence would include resistance to attempts by forceful means to prevent it from discharging its duties under the Mandate of the Security Council”. This places immense responsibility on the local commander.
Confidence building
Confidence building consists of many pillars, which taken together, will result in confidence in a UN mission. In order to make friends with the local population humanitarian aid or humanitarian assistance is important. To be impartial is a must. By confidence building, based on the UN Charter, the UN should have freedom of movement. Then the peacekeepers can do a good job and the whole operation can benefit from media support. All this will in the end give a positive political development.
Management and leadership
Management and leadership of a UN mission must be guided by set regulations, based on earlier experience. Leadership by mission and not by micromanagement should be one rule. Tactical rules such as separation of forces and no co-deployment have also to be respected. The impartiality of a PK mission must include political impartiality, and also demands the solidarity of the member states with UN and within the mission.
Summary
In the future the new media will be an important pressure-group on politicians in democratic societies. This will have a significant influence on PK operations. By an improved system to select personnel and to observe, report and react by using more technical equipment and by better and special training for the PK-units we should in the future be able to meet the more and more complicated and complex PK operations.
Session Two, Paper Two: Training and Preparation of Military Contingents
Lt Gen Satish Nambiar (Retd)
Indian Army
The premise on which international peacekeeping is based is that violence in inter-state and intra-state conflict can be controlled without resort to force, or enforcement measures. Peacekeeping as it evolved over the years, became an extraordinary art because it called for the use of military personnel, not to wage war, but to prevent fighting between belligerents to ensure the maintenance of ceasefires, and to provide a measure of stability in an area of conflict while negotiations were conducted.
Inadequacies that need to be attended to in the training and preparation of contingents and personnel are many, but some of the major ones merit mention, without of course, detracting from the sense of dedication and purpose universally displayed by contingents and personnel participating in UN operations.
Understanding of the local situation can vary from unconcealed bias to total ignorance; this obviously poses problems in dealing with belligerents. Inadequacy of equipment occasioned by lack of an inventory, lack of knowledge of local conditions, slow pace of the UN bureaucracy, and so on, can be severely debilitating factors. Inadequate knowledge of some of the basic concepts of peacekeeping, and the working of the UN organisation, is another. Standards of training in some of the basic aspects like manning of checkpoints, searching of vehicles, manning of observation posts, convoy discipline, escort of humanitarian aid convoys, dealing with refugees, and so on, must receive the attention of the contributor states and the UN HQ.
Hence effective training of contingents and personnel is vital in so far as the aspects mentioned above are concerned. However, equally vital are the aspects of some briefing and guidance in the conduct of negotiations and mediation, faithful reporting of incidents, proper conduct of investigations, and dealing with the media. In addition, one can only add the rather nebulous factor of a ‘grey zone’ generated by contingencies that have now arisen in the context of intra-state conflicts, like armed factions blocking movement of humanitarian aid to populations in distress, actions against what have been declared as UN ‘safe areas’, peacekeepers as hostages, violation of a ‘no-fly zone’, and so on.
Session Two, Paper Three: Training issues or countries new to peacekeeping: A Southern African perspective
Frederick Barron
IDASA, Institute for Democracy in South Africa
Fred Barron gave details of the IDASA programme which has assessed the peacekeeping capabilities of the twelve southern African states, through a consultation process with senior officials from the departments of defence and foreign affairs in SADC countries (Southern African Development Community). It was recognised that the end of the Cold War had permanently altered the southern African security environment, and that most of the states in the region had little experience in the provision of peacekeepers. There is a growing co-operation among states in the region in all matters, including security, which is managed through the Inter State Defence and Security Committee (ISDSC).
The IDASA programme noted a willingness among states in the region to develop common approaches to peacekeeping policy. For example, they noted a reluctance to become involved in peace enforcement operations. There was also a willingness, in principle, to enhance combined training and exercises as well as the modalities of command and control for peacekeeping purposes. This raised a range of issues which SADC states were willing to consider further: the delineation of command structures, the civilian-military interface in peacekeeping operations, the funding of joint operations, shared training facilities, methods of personnel selection and the standardisation of equipment. The IDASA programme also stressed the role of NGOs in peacekeeping operations, but noted that greater accountability among such organisations was required.
IDASA has identified a role for itself in facilitating an information exchange between interested states in the region, although it is keen that it should augment, rather than by-pass, existing structures provided by the UN, OAU, and ISDSC. The paper also raised the military dominance of South Africa in the region, and how this could be used for peacekeeping purposes.
Session Two, Paper Four: Conflict Resolution Training for Military Peacekeepers
Greg Tillett
The University of Western Sydney, Nepean
Military personnel undertaking peacekeeping operations face a range of challenges, some of them arising from the styles of behaviour that have often been learned in traditional military training. In peacekeeping operations, personnel may or may not have any power to coerce, may have no way of readily identifying the status or potential power of any person with whom they are dealing, may have very limited ability to communicate accurately with local residents, and will often be subject to instructions which require them to act in a policing rather than a military role. Effective peacekeeping training can, and should, build onto conventional military training, facilitating the development of additional, rather than contradictory, skills and styles of behaviour.
Peacekeeping forces will, virtually by definition, be in situations of conflict (between others) and inevitably become involved in conflict (with others, within themselves and amongst themselves). Any posting to a military operation is also likely to increase the risk of conflict within families and personal relationships. An essential component of any preparation programme for peacekeeping forces should therefore be conflict resolution.
A standard framework for training in conflict resolution has been developed on the basis of research undertaken with Australian Defence Force personnel.
The workshop consists of three components: an introduction to conflict and its resolution; the concept of analytical problem solving conflict resolution; and the application of the concept.
Conflict is identified by participants as occurring essentially in three stages: 1. Pre-departure; 2. On mission; and 3. On return.
The research with the Australian Defence Forces has identified a relatively consistent inventory of sources of conflict.
The training in conflict resolution provided for Australian Defence Force personnel has produced very positive responses from the personnel involved, both after the training sessions and on their return to Australia.
The success of, and risks to, peacekeeping operations clearly relate to the ability of personnel at all levels to respond effectively to conflict, whether intra-personnel or inter-personal, intra-group or inter-group, whether they are conflict experiencing or conflict observing.
Session Two, Paper Five: Training for Peacekeeping from the Formulation of Doctrine to Practical Application—An Irish Military Perspective
Lt Col Oliver Macdonald
United Nations Training School Ireland (UNTSI)
Peacekeeping has become a term which is loosely applied to an ever-increasing range of activities associated with conflict management in ever-widening areas of actual or potential conflict. One of the results of this development is the recognition of the need for training as a prerequisite for engagement in the international missions related to peacekeeping activities which may include political, social, economic, humanitarian, police and most traditionally, military tasks.
This recognised need for training begs many immediate questions. Some of the more fundamental of these are: -
What training is required and why?
Who needs it?
Who gives it? How?
When and where should it be given?
Does it give the best response to the requirement?
The relatively long experience of the Irish Defence Forces in peacekeeping, mostly, but not exclusively on missions conducted by the United Nations shows one approach to training which has been successfully pursued and modified for close to forty years.
This paper examines three aspects of the peacekeeping training continuum as practised in the Irish Defence Forces where a school devoted exclusively to peacekeeping, UNTSI, was established in 1993 as a school of the Irish Military College.
1. Peacekeeping Doctrine. A clear understanding of the principles and practices of peacekeeping operations coupled with experience allow for the formulation of doctrine which guides the direction and parameters of training. Fundamental policy documents such as An Agenda for Peace and the OSCE Helsinki Document 1992 also contribute to the formulation of the doctrine.
2. Factors governing Training for Military Peacekeeping. Military training is naturally orientated towards self-sufficient operations in the field. Much of this is applicable to peacekeeping. The paper examines some of the principal factors which influence the development of the type, content and duration of training given to full-time, professional volunteers for peacekeeping operations.
3. Peacekeeping Training Courses. Once general training has created an aptitude for peacekeeping, specific training courses are conducted for each mission. These courses are combinations of theory and practice which impact the knowledge and skills needed to perform the tasks of a particular mission. As an example of such courses the paper included a typical programme for the basic training of a UN Military Observer. It presumes the students to be professional officers of at least 10 years standing.
Conference Paper Summaries
Session Three: The Training and Preparation of Civilian Peacekeepers
Session Three, Paper One: Training and Preparation of United Nations Civilian Police Monitors (UNCIVPOL)
O P Rathor
Civilian Police Adviser, DPKO
1. The increasing demand for the civilian police and their frequent participation in UN peacekeeping missions has given rise to the creation of the civilian police unit in the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO). The UN civilian police officers are playing an increasingly important role in peacekeeping operations, especially since they are playing a central role in UN peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
2. CIVPOL officers are developed in Angola, Cyprus, Western Sahara, Haiti, Guatemala, Eastern Slavonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Macedonia. The role of CIVPOL is crucial to the success of these missions. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that the performance of CIVPOL officers is of the highest standard in the mission areas. This crucial role demands that the best suited are selected. The UN guidelines have set out qualifications for prospective UNCIVPOL. These include driving skills, mission language proficiency, rank civilian police experience and excellent past performance record.
3. The main problem at the onset is the delay in the selection process which causes delays in deployment. This calls for the development of a mechanism within member states to ensure capacity for prompt selection.
4. To ensure the quality of the CIVPOL officers, they have to undergo the mission language and driving tests in the mission area. We find that the basic mission language requirement is not fulfilled by some officers and many of them do not pass in the driving skills assessment test. This causes unnecessary expenditure to the UN and the contributing member states. Serious efforts are required to avoid this unnecessary expenditure, delay in deployment and demoralization of police officers.
5. Proper selection and training at the national level will go a long way in reducing these teething problems. We have tried our best to provide maximum and timely information to the member states on UN standards and requirements. Guidelines and user courses for language have been developed and provided to the member states.
6. As a pilot project, DPKO has sent out a selection assistance team (SAT) to a few countries to assist the governments in the selection and testing of police officers designated for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Eastern Slavonia.
7. At UNHQ, we are in regular contact with the permanent missions of member states. We have to find ways and means to streamline the available resources to further strengthen the UNCIVPOL so that they can play a more useful role in peacekeeping operations.
The main tasks of CIVPOL component generally are:
8. Monitoring, training and assistance. Monitoring includes observation, inspection, investigation and patrolling.
9. One of the most important factors determining the effective and efficient functioning of a civilian police operation is training. In a multinational operation there are wide disparities at the level of training and preparation. It is useful to have a baseline training that will equip the CIVPOL personnel with the necessary knowledge to function in a large UN peacekeeping operation.
The needs for training can be divided into two categories:
10. i) General peacekeeping training (Core Training); ii) Mission specific training
11. Actual training and preparation of contingents is the task of the member states. DPKO is providing the overall standards and guidelines.
12. The main objective of the training is to enhance the effective functioning of the operations. It would help reduce any knowledge gap that exists among different national CIVPOL contingents. Proper training would serve to enhance the overall credibility, professionalism and image of the CIVPOL officers in all UN peacekeeping operations.
Session Three, Paper Two: The Training of Peacekeepers
Jean-Michel Monod
International Committee of the Red Cross
The paper prepared for the conference by Mr Jean-Michel Monod, of the International Committee of the Red Cross, deals with the question of the applicability of international humanitarian law to UNPKO on the field.
The paper recalls the numerous discussions held between legal advisers both from the UN and the ICRC, aimed at overcoming the difficulty arising from the fact that the United Nations, not being a power in the sense of the article 1 common to the four Geneva Conventions, it cannot formally become a party to these conventions nor to their additional protocols.
The result of these negotiations has been the drafting of a set of guidelines for contingents put at the disposal of the United Nations, summarizing the main elements of the conventions and their protocols, but which do not supersede the responsibility of the states of origin of these troops, which retain the overall task of disseminating this law among their troops and to punish, in accordance with their national legislation, those soldiers who would be recognized as responsible for committing grave breaches of this law.
Incidentally, the final version of these guidelines was handed over to the Secretary General of the UN by the president of the ICRC for implementation on 10 May 1996.
Mr Monod went on to ask whether international humanitarian law,—a pure product of the second world war and of the decolonisation period—can still be considered relevant today when confronted to the new brand of destructured armed conflicts we see mushrooming around the world.
Recalling the fundamental principles of this law—humanity, in the behaviour of combatants towards any category of victims: injured, prisoners, civilians in general, but also impartiality in regard of the treatment extended to people in need, irrespectively of the side they are on, military necessity, a principle aiming at limiting the damages of war to what is strictly necessary in order to reach the military objective—the speaker concludes that although all these principles are still valid in all known situations of armed conflicts, the reality of the field shows some important differences.
Recalling the recent murder of three ICRC delegates in Burundi, Mr Monod goes on to demonstrate that extreme situations such as Rwanda and Burundi, where the final aim is not simply a military and political victory over the enemy, but first and foremost the physical elimination of the other party, are clearly incompatible with the principle of humanity. Therefore, one can say that in such cases, IHL protects neither the victims, nor those whose job it is to remind the parties about their duty to ensure respect for the law.
Finally, Mr Monod gave some concrete examples of what the ICRC actually does to help armed and security forces around the world to train their troops to respect IHL. He concentrated particularly on the new modules recently developed by the ICRC for the training of security/paramilitary forces.
In addition to his presentation, the delegate of the ICRC put at the disposal of the participants three CD-Roms on IHL, the training of troops in the law of war (developed jointly with the Swiss armed forces), and the problem of anti-personnel land-mines.
Session Three, Paper Three: Staffing Peacekeeping Operations: Civilian Personnel
Fabrizio Pagani
Training Programme: The Civilian Personnel of Peacekeeping/Humanitarian Operations and Election Monitoring Missions: Volunteers, Officers, Observers, Scuola Superiore S. Anna, Pisa, Italy.
Multifunctional peacekeeping operations mean that the civilian component of missions are called upon to play an increasingly active role. The civilians working in UN field operations can be grouped into various categories: the International Staff, the Local Staff, the International Contractual Staff.
These categories differ in terms of recruitment procedures, administrative and economic conditions of service and legal status. The international staff is drawn from the following sources: the UN Secretariat and specialised agencies and organisations, outside recruitment from Member States and NGOs, and the United Nations Volunteers. The local staff is recruited for adminstrative support tasks. The international contractual personnel is an innovative means of recruitment which was used by the UNPROFOR mission to fulfill technical, trades and crafts related functions. The personnel was provided by international service agencies by contract.
The recruitment policies and procedures of other organisations involved in field operations differ significantly. In these organisations, mainly the OSCE and EU, the personnel is made up of seconded staff. For some missions, the Member States provide their own public officials, mainly from the diplomatic service. In other cases, due to the size and rate of expansion of the operation, external forms of recruitment are necessary. The usual route taken has been to recruit through the competent authorities of the Member States. The OSCE, for example, relies on Ministries of Foreign Affairs of individual states to select and sometimes, after further screening, to recruit its field personnel.
A number of steps could be taken to enhance the ability of international organisations to respond with readily available and qualified personnel:
Session four of the conference was an open session aimed at helping INCORE define its future research agenda in relation to peacekeeping. Possible topics for future research, as well as methodological issues, were raised. Among the methodological problems discussed was the question of access for researchers to military peacekeepers and their governments. It was suggested that the best way to gain access to peacekeepers, (for example, a contingent from a country new to peacekeeping), was to ask what we can learn from them. In other words, to engage the target group in the project and work with them, rather than producing work and targeting it at them. The Euro-centric tendency of much peacekeeping research was also mentioned, as was the tendency of research to be country or mission specific and so often lack general applicability. Problems arising from terminology were also raised, particularly in relation to the trend towards peace enforcement and how it complicates traditional analyses of peacekeeping. The outcome of peacekeeping research also prompted discussion. There was agreement that new research had to be timely, relevant and policy-oriented. One problem, however, was international access to new research. It was suggested that the creation of a central depository of peacekeeping research materials would be very useful.
Not surprisingly, training and preparation issues featured prominently in the discussions. It was noted that the prerequisite for a good military peacekeeper was a good soldier, and that not only must he or she accept the basic concepts of peacekeeping, but they must also be able to accept the risks involved in peacekeeping. One participant noted that casualties are inevitable in many operations, and suggested that pre-departure peacekeeper training and preparation programmes should cover the management of casualties. This preparation for the possibility of casualties should range from the casualty’s colleagues, to family circle and broader national opinion. In relation to CIVPOL, it was stressed that one of the primary roles of United Nations civilian police personnel was to train a police cadre in post-conflict areas. While some conference participants argued that peacekeepers, military and civilian, would benefit from common training, or at least a common handbook, others suggested that national variations do have a value, and that the international community should avoid ‘cloning’ peacekeepers. According to some, different training regimes could complement each other. While it was generally agreed that there is quite a lot of information available on the different types of training employed by different militaries and NGOs, less was known about the effectiveness of training, and in particular about how contact skills could be taught. One problem raised was that military and civilian peacekeeper programmes are often restricted to short time-periods, which limits the opportunity for research. A discussion on the training of military peacekeepers noted a strong resistance within armed forces to the reporting of personal matters. There seemed to be an in-built culture of coping, and to ask for help was often regarded as a sign of weakness. Another preparation issue which was raised was the increasing importance of cultural sensitivity towards the population of the host country during a peacekeeping mission. One participant noted that cross-cultural issues were often dealt with on the level of just another piece of information to be imparted before departure. Instead, it was argued, they should be dealt with as a contact or interpersonal skill.
Related to this issue was the whole notion of the ‘consumers of peacekeeping’ which a number of participants said was under-researched. One participant said that it would be useful to investigate the impact of six-monthly rotations of peacekeeping contingents on host populations, as well as the financial impact of PKOs. Another suggested that it was time for the UN to try to transcend its role of reacting to crises at the last moment and often with an information, equipment and financial deficit. To do so, it was argued, it must build models of countries in which peacekeeping operations may be likely in the future. These models must go beyond country profiles and instead examine human issues, such as the value of life in a particular country or the capacity of the population to suffer. Such issues may influence the length of a peacekeeping operation, and perhaps the enthusiasm with which western governments may commit troops. It is often assumed that people in the host country accept peacekeeping, but in reality they often have little choice and there are likely to be a variety of opinions and reactions. It was also suggested that the objectives and opinions of the other side of this equation, the donors to peacekeeping operations, (governments, treasuries, public opinion), are under-researched.
Another preparation issue which was raised was that military research and development has concentrated on equipping the fighting soldier rather than the peacekeeper. It was argued that many peacekeeping tasks could be made simpler and safer by the deployment of specialist equipment, for example, de-mining or surveillance devices. However, an NGO representative suggested that the increasing use of technology in PKOs may mean that the military will monopolise many formerly civilian roles in future PKOs. Another NGO representative said that NGO personnel are often in place before military personnel arrive in a mission area. He said that they have often built up a network of relationships with the local population which may be overlooked by military peacekeepers. NGO representatives also brought up the point that training was very expensive. The general emphasis on training for military personnel, as opposed to civilians was also mentioned. Another civilian related problem which was discussed was the need for a more precise clarification of the status and roles of civilian peacekeepers. For example, one participant noted that international staff among civilian personnel are covered by UN status and privileges. However, he also noted that up to two-thirds of civilian staff are locally recruited, and their status, and indeed remuneration rights, are less well defined.
In terms the organisation of peacekeeping operations, one former senior peacekeeper stressed the need for standard operating procedures to be introduced for dealing with the many contingencies which peacekeepers face, for example, refugee problems or hostage taking. He said that it was vital for all the parties to a conflict to know how the UN will react in a given situation, and equally important for the UN to act as it promised. It was also suggested that the UN makes greater use of commanders and contingents who have previous experience of working together in PKOs. A number of participants noted that the most important stage of a peacekeeping operation was its start, and if the core elements of the operation were correctly put in place at this critical phase, then the operation’s chances of success would be greatly enhanced. One participant noted that a range of social, political and economic factors are on-going at the deployment stage of a mission, but that the peacekeepers are often so engrossed in securing their areas of operation and their logistical lines that they might not be aware of these factors. Another participant noted that much debate on the issue of peacekeeping was concerned with the issue of ‘minimum force.’ What was needed, he said, was a precision of force, which could be based on accurate intelligence and adequate preparation. The whole issue of the ‘success’ of PKOs was also discussed. One participant noted that even though many peacekeepers are not mandated to effect a political settlement, they tend to feel failures if the operation does not end in one. One participant with experience of UNPROFOR, felt that the operation had been a success in terms of the distribution of humanitarian aid and the containment of the conflict, and that those involved could justly feel proud. What failed, according to this view, was parallel political developments, and peacekeepers on the ground should not be tarnished by political failure to reach a settlement.
Biographies of Conference Speakers and Chairpersons
Frederick Barron is the Manager of the Peacekeeping Project in the Defence and Security Programme at the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (IDASA). The project has involved consultative visits to all Southern African countries with a view to developing a collective capacity for the training of military peacekeepers for UN peace support activities.
Lt Col Colm Doyle is Commanding Officer of the 12th Infantry Battalion of the Irish Army based at Sarsfield Barracks, Limerick. He was previously based at the United Nations Training School Ireland (UNTSI) and has considerable UN experience (Cyprus, UNIFIL, UNTSO). He initially served in the Former Yugoslavia between October 1991 and March 1992 as a member of the European Community Monitoring Mission. From November 1991 to March 1992 he was head of the mission for Bosnia Herzegovina based in Sarajevo. He was then selected by Lord Peter Carrington (Chairman of the International Peace Conference for the Former Yugoslavia) to be his personal representative for Bosnia and returned to the mission area from April to October 1992. During this period he negotiated many of the ceasefires and played a prominent role in the hostage release of President Izetbegovic. He was also part of the Peace Conference negotiation team for Bosnia Herzegovina.
Claus Heje, a Danish National, was a Research Assistant at the Irish Peace Institute Research Centre (University of Limerick) and carried out much of the research for the military side of the INCORE Report on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers. He is currently completing a postgraduate degree at the University of Copenhagen.
Momoyo Ise, a Japanese national, has served the United Nations in a variety of capacities since 1969. She has been heavily involved in the establishment and running of the United Nations University in Tokyo. In 1985 she was appointed Chief of the Training Service in the Office of Human Resources Management where she developed and managed training services for some 14,000 staff members at the UN Secretariat. She has also worked closely with the Departments of Peacekeeping Operations, Political Affairs and Humanitarian Affairs in the training of civilian staff and peacekeepers.
Professor Alan James is Research Professor of International Relations at Keele University. He has written extensively on peacekeeping, including The Politics of Peacekeeping (1969) and Peacekeeping in International Politics (1990). His most recent book, Britain and the Congo Crisis, 1960-63 (1996) examines a peacekeeping operation from one national perspective. He is now starting work on a major project entitled ‘Keeping the Peace in Cyprus, 1963-64.’
Lt Col Oliver AK Macdonald is Executive Officer and Chief Instructor at the United Nations Training School, Ireland (UNTSI) in the Military College. An Infantry Officer, he served two tours of duty with UNFICYP in Cyprus. He was Operations Officer in the Irish Battalion in UNIFIL Lebanon. He served with UNTAG in Namibia where he was Military Co-ordinator for the election operation and was appointed to the Tripartite Integration Commission. He was a member of the EC Task Force in Russia in 1992 and was Chief of Staff of the CSCE Mission to Georgia in 1994. In 1995, he visited UNIFIL, UNTSO and UNDOF in the Middle East and attended the International Peace Academy (IPA) in Vienna.
Professor Valerie Morgan is Research Director of INCORE and Professor in the School of History, Philosophy and Politics at the University of Ulster. Her main research interests are women’s attitudes and experiences in societies experiencing ethnic conflict and the development of educational structures to promote pluralism in divided societies. She has published extensively on the role of women in the Northern Ireland conflict and on the policy implications of educational innovations designed to address attitudes to ethnic violence.
Jean-Michel Monod is a Swiss citizen and Delegate General for Asia and the Pacific at the International Committee of the Red Cross Headquarters in Geneva. He joined the ICRC in 1976 as a field delegate and has served in different capacities in Lebanon (1976-78), Gaza (1978-80), Pakistan (1981-82), India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar (Burma) (1982-83 and 1985-89), and Thailand (1983-85).
Professor Edward Moxon-Browne is Research Dean at the University of Limerick, Ireland. He was Research Co-ordinator of the military side of the INCORE Report on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers. He has published extensively on terrorism, Spain, Northern Ireland and the European Union.
Lt General Satish Nambiar PVSM AVSM VrC entered the Indian Military Academy in 1956. After being commissioned into the 29th Battalion of the Maratha Light Infantry, he served in various operational areas and saw active service in the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak Conflicts (he was awarded the Vir Chakra for gallantry). He has served in a number of training capacities, as Military adviser to the Indian High Commission in London, Additional Director General Military Operations at Army HQ in New Delhi and as Director General of Military Operations (1991). General Nambiar was appointed Force Commander and Head of Mission of UNPROFOR and was closely involved in the operation’s formation and early operations. Returning to India, he retired as Deputy Chief of Staff in August 1994 and is now actively engaged in the study and analysis of UN peacekeeping and international relations.
Fabrizio Pagani is a researcher in International Law at the School of Political Science, University of Pisa and Assistant Director of the Civilian Personnel Training Programme (The Civilian Personnel of the Peacekeeping/Humanitarian Operations and the Election Monitoring Mission: Volunteers, Officers, Observers) at the Scuola Superiore di Studi Universitari e di Perfezionamento, Pisa, Italy. He is engaged in a number of peacekeeping related research projects including one on the role of the OSCE, and another on Italian-German co-operation.
Dr Oliver Ramsbotham is Senior Lecturer in Peace Studies at the Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford. With Tom Woodhouse he is co-author of Humanitarian Intervention in Contemporary Conflict: A Reconceptualisation (1989) and co-edits International Peacekeeping News, a bi-monthly digest of information and analysis related to contemporary peacekeeping. Both are also involved in producing a reference guide on international peacekeeping.
Om Prakash Rathor is Police Adviser at the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, United Nations Headquarters, New York. Previously he was Deputy Inspector General in Gwalior, Central India.
Brigadier TS Shergill is Defence and Military Attaché at the Embassy of India in Washington DC. His extensive military experience extends from commanding troops during the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak conflicts (during which he was mentioned in dispatches for gallantry) to commanding the Independent Armoured Brigade in North India where, apart from normal duties, he was also responsible for internal security and counter insurgency duties. He has also served as an instructor at the Defence Services Staff College, Wellington, India. He was closely involved in the formation and management of the Indian Peacekeeping Contingent in India. He is the author of Counter Insurgency: Support to a host nation (1987) and has written a number of papers on ‘Urban Insurgency’, ‘Politics of International Terrorism’, and ‘Peacekeeping in the New World Order.’
Dr Gregory Tillett is Senior Research Fellow in Conflict Resolution at the University of Western Sydney, Nepean and a consultant on conflict resolution training for peacekeeping forces to the Australian Army. He was previously Director of The Centre for Conflict Resolution at Macquarie University.
Arno Truger is Deputy Executive President of the Austrian Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) in Stadschlaining, Austria and Director of the International Civilian Peacekeeping and Peace-Building Training Program (IPT). He has been heavily involved in teaching and research in peace studies and was Research Co-ordinator of the civilian component of the INCORE Report on the Training and Preparation of Military and Civilian Peacekeepers.
Lt General Lars-Eric Wahlgren of the Swedish Armed Forces succeeded Lt-Gen Satish Nambiar as UNPROFOR Force Commander and Head of Mission. Previous peacekeeping experience included Force Commander of UNIFIL (until 1988) and Commanding Officer of the Swedish Contingent of UNEF in the Sinai. Between 1983-1988 he was commanding General of the Gotland Military Command.
Dr Tom Woodhouse is a Senior Lecturer, and Director of the Centre for Conflict Resolution, Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford. His publications on peacekeeping include Peacemaking in a Troubled World, (editor) (1989), and Humanitarian Intervention in Contemporary Conflict: A Reconceptualisation, (with Oliver Ramsbotham) (1989). Also with Oliver Ramsbotham he edits International Peacekeeping News.
Email this citation