Artikel mit ‘Le Roy’ getagged

Annual Review of Global Peace Operations 2009

Dienstag, 07. April 2009

Das Center on International Cooperation (CIC) der New York University hat auch 2009 wieder eine Übersicht und Evaluierung aller UN-Einsätze vorgenommen. Leider ist diese nur käuflich zu erwerben. Die Financial Times hat immerhin einen Artikel dazu veröffentlicht, der die Problematik anschneidet, dass ein Großteil der Soldaten in UN-Einsätzen aus Entwicklungsländern stammt und die Industriestaaten sehr zögerlich sind, Soldaten zu entsenden. Das unterstreicht die FT auch mit einem brauchbaren Schaubild. Außerdem wird hier, in Anlehnung an das von Alain Le Roy (Untergeneralsekretär für Friedenseinsätze) verfasste Vorwort, angedeutet, dass UN-Einsätze nicht unbedingt einfach immer nur personell und vom Aufgabenbereich her erweitert werden können:

United Nations military operations might have reached their limits, with the two largest peacekeeping operations stretched to breaking point in the past year, the organisation’s chief peacekeeper warns in a report to be published on Tuesday.
The warning from Alain Le Roy, under-secretary general for peacekeeping operations, appears in a foreword to the annual peacekeeping survey of the New York-based Center on International Co-operation.
It comes a year after the centre’s last review criticised the security council for authorising big new peacekeeping missions round the world in spite of warnings that demands on troop contributors were overtaking their ability to deliver.
The UN is currently responsible for 18 peace missions worldwide that deploy 112,000 uniformed personnel at the cost of almost $8bn a year. “UN peacekeeping is now at an all-time high,” according to Mr Le Roy.
In the light of the near-collapse last October of the peacekeeping mission in Democratic Republic of the Congo, the UN’s largest, the security council has finally taken note. France and the UK have launched a review on how best to fix a system that one diplomat at the UN described as “breaking at the seams”.
The crisis was highlighted during a rebel offensive in eastern Congo in October, when protesters stoned a UN compound over the alleged failure of peacekeepers to halt the rebel advance.

Dieses Beispiel aus der DR Congo ist ganz spannend, weil es hier fast als eine Art “Befehlsverweigerung” dargestellt wird:

National units of the UN force refused to deploy without orders from their own officers. Lieutenant-general Vicente Díaz de Villegas of Spain quit abruptly after only three weeks in command of the UN force.
Defending his decision not to put forces under his command at risk, General Diaz de Villegas told a Spanish newspaper this month: “There was no assessment of the risks and threats. Security plans had to be revised. There was no plan for intelligence gathering and no reserves.”
Mr Le Roy acknowledges that in Congo and in Sudan’s western Darfur province “UN peacekeepers found themselves in dangerous and violent situations that stretched their ability to function to the very breaking point.”
The centre’s report warns of “the steady blurring of the lines between peacekeeping and war fighting”.

Ließt man letztlich aber das Vorwort von Le Roy, taucht zwar tatsätzlich die Frage auf, “Have we reached the limits of our capabilities?”, von kritischer Selbstreflexion ist Le Roy aber weit entfernt. Zum Beispiel, wenn er Haiti und Kosovo (Anfang 2009!) als gelungene Beispiele für UN-Interventionen nennt:

But let us not forget that there are, of course, many important examples of successful UN peacekeeping that has helped to improve the lives of hundreds of millions of the world’s most vulnerable people. Recently, in Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Kosovo, circumstances have improved sufficiently to allow the UN to complete or continue drawing down its operations. The situation has also continued to improve in Haiti, Côte d’Ivoire, and Timor-Leste. In Lebanon, peacekeepers have helped to build confidence and continued to help prevent the resumption of hostilities along the Litani River.

Da wundert man sich dann auch nicht mehr, dass sich das CIC nicht schämt, seine Publikation mit einem Zitat von Martti Ahtisaari zu bewerben…

Eher ironisch wirkt dagegen, dass das CIC nur wenige Zeilen darunter eine andere Publikation bewirbt, welche die Bemühungen der UN um State-Building in Haiti eher kritisch bewertet. Zum Abschluss einige sehr selektive Auszüge aus diesem Dokument “U.N. Peace Operations and State-building: A Case Study of Haiti” vom März 2009:

As regards its broader efforts to consolidate peace, the UN System (and donors more broadly) could benefit from more systematic consideration of the distinct but interrelated challenges of enhancing state legitimacy and state capacity. In Haiti, the principal state-building activities concentrated first on state capacity (rather than legitimacy), and second, on specific sectors rather than holistic needs. It is far easier in terms of institutional practice for international actors, and especially the state-based United Nations, to address the latter than the former. But legitimacy is at least as important as capacity in state sustainability…
Some longtime international analysts dismissed linear notions of progress in institutional reform in Haiti. Instead, they argue that reform patterns are more cyclical or circular. They readily point to UN-supported efforts to reform state institutions ranging from the Haitian National Police (HNP) to the justice system to the corrections system to the civil service in the 1990s. Such efforts are widely acknowledged to have failed but are being reprised with the same actors and outlines today…
In Haiti, the UN System and partners
should engage the issues of legitimacy discussed above. Sustainable state legitimacy requires sensitivity to ameliorating, and not deepening, the political and economic inequalities in the country. MINUSTAH is seen as having worked closely with the country’s political and economic elites and has not developed deep or broad relations with Haitian civil society.