Criminal Practices Among UN Peacekeepers Research Paper

Introduction

The United Nations (UN) was established in October 1945 in the immediate aftermath of World War II with the overarching mission to prevent future international conflicts. To this end, the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations was formed just 3 years later in response to the emerging conflict between India and Pakistan. Since that time – and to their credit -- UN peacekeepers operating under the auspices of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations have completed hundreds of missions in Africa, Central and South America, Asia, the Middle East and Europe. The behaviors of the UN peacekeepers, though, have not always been exemplary and in some cases have even risen to the level of corruption and even worse. To determine the facts about the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, this study systematically reviews the relevant literature concerning UN peacekeeping missions in general and those that have been marred by corruption and other criminal activities such as those that took place in Haiti following the massive earthquake in 2010 in particular. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings about the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations and its track record in the field are provided in the study’s conclusion.

Review and Analysis

Overview of the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations

The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) is responsible for the provision of executive and political directions for all global UN peacekeeping operations in coordination with the UN Security Council as well as Member States that contribute monetary support and military forces to these operations. The DPKO is also tasked with maintaining open lines of communication with the conflicts parties during its peacekeeping operations.[footnoteRef:2] In addition, the DPKO also serves in an advisory capacity for other UN peacebuilding missions and political initiatives.[footnoteRef:3] [2: “Department of Peacekeeping Operations [DPKO]” (2017). United Nations. [online] available: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/about/dpko/, p. 1.] [3: DPKO, p. 1.]



The first peacekeeping mission performed by the UN in 1948 in response to the partition of India and Pakistan under the purview of the UN Office of Special Political Affairs which retained control of UN peacekeeping operations until 1992 when the DPKO was formally established during the tenure of Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali.[footnoteRef:4] At present, the DPKO consists of four main offices as set forth in Table 1 below. [4: DPKO, p. 2.]



Table 1

Four main offices of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations

Office

Description



Office of Operations

The main role of the Office of Operations is to provide political and strategic policy and operational guidance and support to the missions.



Office of the Rule of Law and Security Institutions (OROLSI)

The OROLSI) was established in 2007 to strengthen the links and coordinate the Department’s activities in the areas of police, justice and corrections, mine action, the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants and security sector reform.



Office of Military Affairs (OMA)

The OMA works to deploy the most appropriate military capability in support of United Nations objectives; and to enhance performance and improve the efficiency and the effectiveness of military components in United Nations Peacekeeping missions.



Policy Evaluation and Training Division (PET)

The PET Division provides an integrated capacity to develop and disseminate policy and doctrine; to develop, coordinate and deliver standardized training; to evaluate mission progress towards mandate implementation; and to develop policies and operational frameworks for strategic cooperation with various UN and external partners.







Source: Adapted from Department of Peacekeeping Operations, 2017

As of May 31, 2017, the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations was comprised of the following resources:

· 83,499 serving troops and military observers

· 12,494 police personnel;

· 5,043 international civilian personnel;

· 10,276 local civilian staff;

· 1,599 UN Volunteers.

· 124 countries contributed military and police personnel.[footnoteRef:5] [5: “About Us.” (2017). UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations. [online] available: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/about/, p. 1.]



Because the UN does not maintain a police force, peacekeeping missions are performed by military or law enforcement representatives that are contributed by Member States. It is also noteworthy that in recent years, UN peacekeepers have been tasked with nation-building activities such as: (a) assisting in political processes; (b) reforming judicial systems; (c) training law enforcement and police forces; (d) disarming and reintegrating former combatants; and (e) supporting the return of internally displaced persons and refugees.[footnoteRef:6] Some indication of the enormity of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations can be easily discerned from the map of past and current peacekeeping missions shown in Figure 1 below. [6: Department of Peacekeeping Operations, p. 3.]





Figure 1. Past and current UN peacekeeping missions

Source: http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/MobileSwitcher/v2/images/1413-1436432920 426954207.png

Corruption and Other Criminal Activities within UN Peacekeeping Missions

Besides frequently lacking sufficient peacekeeping personnel to effectively perform their missions, UN peacekeeping operations are also hampered by qualitative issues as well. For instance, one of the major constraints to maintaining a global peacekeeping force comprised of contributions from UN Member States is the vast diversity of the peacekeeping forces in terms of their respective levels of training and experience as well as profound cross-cultural differences.[footnoteRef:7] These constraints have adversely affected relationships between UN peacekeeping forces and local law enforcement authorities in the past as well as their ability to achieve their strategic objectives.[footnoteRef:8] [7: Harvey Langholtz and Boris Kondoch (2005). International Peacekeeping: The Yearbook of International Peace Operations. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, p. 96.] [8: Langholtz and Kondoch, p. 96.]



Moreover, some UN peacekeepers simply lack the professional expertise and experience that are required to adequately respond to violent conflicts in multinational settings. For example, Langholtz and Kondoch (2009) emphasize that, “Many [UN] police officers lack the basic prerequisites for an international mission: They do not speak English, they have no mastery of weapon use (necessary in armed executive missions) and cannot drive the all-terrain vehicles of the UN police.”[footnoteRef:9] Certainly, these limitations are not insurmountable but they do underscore the lack of preparation and training afforded UN peacekeeping missions, due in part to the urgency of their deployment. For example, Grey-Johnson (2006) emphasizes that: [9: Langholtz and Kondoch, p. 96.]



UN peacekeeping missions in internal conflicts are mounted when there has been a near-total breakdown of law and order: Governments have lost control; civilians are at the mercy of the warring parties; women, children and other vulnerable groups face extreme hardships; and there appears to be no end in sight.[footnoteRef:10] [10: Grispin Grey-Johnson (2006, March-May). “Beyond Peacekeeping: The Challenges of Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Peacebuilding in Africa.” UN Chronicle, vol. 43, no. 2, p. 8.]



In these types of situations, UN peacekeeping forces are required to perform most or all of civilian law enforcement operations as well as restoring security to public institutions. Other short-term priorities for UN peacekeeping missions include: (a) stop the hostilities; (b) protect the civilian population; (c) demobilize combatants; (d) restore state authority; (e) relaunch democratic governance processes; and (f) organize multiparty elections.[footnoteRef:11] Taken together, it is apparent that UN peacekeepers are faced with a truly daunting enterprise when they are deployed to these types of global hot spots, but the aforementioned urgency involved means that in far too many cases, UN peacekeepers lack the training and guidance they need to address highly complex social and political situations. [11: Grey-Johnson, p. 8.]



Furthermore, and more troubling still, however, have been the contributions of peacekeeping forces by developing nations that have poor human rights track records and which lack the resources to adequately train their peacekeepers, many of whom have been involuntarily drafted into these roles by their governments. While it is reasonable to suggest that the majority of these forces behave in a professional manner during their missions, the potential for corruption and even worse becomes more acute when peacekeepers from countries with a poor human rights record and high levels of corruption themselves are involved. As a result, Langholtz and Kondoch point out that, “Their behavior in missions is therefore often unsatisfactory. Although few, there are even cases of gross misconduct (torturing of detainees) and misbehavior (black-marketeering, corruption, promotion of prostitution) involving UN Civilian Police (UNCIVPOL) officers.” [footnoteRef:12] It is important to note, though, that not all instances of corruption and other criminal activities committed by UN peacekeeping forces have been limited to representative from developing nations, and in far too many cases even the most professional and well-intentioned officers and civilians lack the specific training needed for complex UN peacekeeping missions.[footnoteRef:13] [12: Langholtz and Kondoch, p. 96.] [13: Eric G. Berman and Katie E. Sams (2000). Peacekeeping in Africa: Capabilities and Culpabilities. Geneva: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, p. 256.]



Furthermore, rampant corruption within the public and private sectors of many countries was responsible in varying degrees for causing the…