Ingvild Magnæs Gjelsvik

Police Reform and Community Policing in Kenya: The Bumpy Road from Policy to Practice

A reform is underway in Kenya, aimed at transforming the police organization into a people- centred police service. Among other things, this involves enhancing police-public trust and partnerships through community policing (COP). Two state-initiated COP models have been implemented: the National Police Service’s Community Policing Structure, and the Nyumba Kumi model of the President’s Office. On paper, police reform and the two COP models would appear to have the potential to improve police-public cooperation. In practice, however, implementation has proven difficult. Interviews and meetings with local community organizations, community representatives and police officers in urban and rural parts of Kenya indicate that scepticism towards the two COP models is common, as is refusal to engage in them. But why is this so? Why are these two COP models unsuccessful in enhancing police-public trust and cooperation? This article analyses how various contextual factors—such as conflicting socio-economic and political interests at the community and national levels, institutional challenges within the police, the overall role and mandate of the police in Kenya, and a top-down approach to COP—impede the intended police paradigm shift.

Disengaging from violent extremism: The case of al-Shabaab in Somalia

Disengagement, rehabilitation and reintegration for members of violent extremist groups during ongoing conflict is a tricky matter. Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) programmes are normally implemented after a peace agreement is in place. However, this does not apply to south central Somalia, as well as other conflict-ridden areas around the world today. Providing adequate security for those wanting to leave violent extremist groups is arguably a key element for success for programmes operating in such contexts. This article looks at some of the security challenges the Defector Rehabilitation Programme (DRP) for al-Shabaab members has encountered in south central Somalia. The lessons learnt presented in this article were mainly gathered through discussions and presentations made at a training held in Nairobi in November 2017 by the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) for programme staff in the DRP. Interviews and conversations were also carried out with staff members and partners involved in different stages of the programme, and practitioners and stakeholders working to prevent or counter violent extremism in Somalia, during field trips to south central Somalia between 2013 and 2017

Should I stay or should I go? Security considerations for members leaving al-Shabaab in Somalia

The Somali jihadi organization al-Shabaab, yet again featured in the news internationally when they attacked a business and hotel complex in Nairobi 15 January this year. This is not the first time the group carries out largescale attacks outside the Somali boarders. Other examples are the Garissa University College attack in 2015, the mass shooting at Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi in 2013 and the Kampala attacks in 2010. However, the majority of the atrocities committed by al-Shabaab take place in South Central Somalia. The Global Terrorism Index 2018 ranked Somalia as number 6 on its list of countries most impacted by terrorism in 2017.1 Al-Shabaab was behind the deadliest terrorist attack in 2017 worldwide, when a suicide bomber detonated an explosives-laden truck, killing 587 people in Mogadishu. Although al-Shabaab has had several military setbacks the last few years, the group still poses a significant threat to security and stability in the region. As the name al-Shabaab (‘the youth’) indicates, young people predominate in the group. This means that thousands of individuals spend parts of their youth in al- Shabaab. The question then arises: how to best assist the ones who want to leave the group?

Protection of civilians in the absence of peace agreements: Darfur, Chad/CAR, and Côte d’Ivoire

This edited volume offers a thorough review of peacekeeping theory and reality in contemporary contexts, and aligns the two to help inform practice. Recent UN peacekeeping operations have challenged the traditional peacekeeping principles of consent, impartiality and the minimum use of force. The pace and scope of these changes have now reached a tipping point, as the new mandates are fundamentally challenging the continued validity of the UN peacekeeping’s core principles and identity. In response the volume analyses the growing gap between these actual practices and existing UN peacekeeping doctrine, exploring how it undermines the effectiveness of UN operations, and endangers lives, arguing that a common doctrine is a critical starting point for effective multi-national operations. In order to determine the degree to which this general principle applies to the current state of UN peacekeeping, this book: - Provides a review of conceptual and doctrinal developments in UN peacekeeping operations through a historical perspective - Examines the debate related to peace operations doctrine and concepts among key Member States - Focuses on the actual practice of peacekeeping by conducting case studies of several UN peacekeeping missions in order to identify gaps between practice and doctrine - Critically analyses gaps between emerging peacekeeping practice and existing doctrine - Recommends that the UN moves beyond the peacekeeping principles and doctrine of the past Combining empirical case-based studies on UN peace operations, with studies on the views and policies of key UN Security Council members that generate these mandates, and views of key contributors of UN peacekeepers, this volume will be of great use to policy-makers; UN officials and peace operations practitioners; and academics working on peace and conflict/security studies, international organizations and conflict management.

United Nations Peace Operations: Aligning Principles and Practice

Connections and Disconnections: Understanding and Integrating Local Perceptions in United Nations Peacekeeping

Female Bodies and Masculine Norms: Challenging Gender Discourses and the Implementation of Resolution 1325 in Peace Operations in Africa

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (2000) was hailed as a pioneering step in acknowledging the varied roles of women in conflict and promoting their participation in peace processes and in peacebuilding. This report takes a critical look at the inclusion and exclusion of Res. 1325 in peace operations in Africa. It focuses on the meaning and importance of gender perspectives in these operations rather than “women’s perspectives.” Peace operations in Africa are clearly male-dominated, with on average 3% women in uniform (police and military), and about 17% women among the civilian staff. However, simply adding more women to peace operations is not sufficient in itself. Such an approach is based on essentialist assumptions of women and men and their assumed “innate potentials.” The report moves on to discuss some more qualitative aspects of gender perspectives in these operations: gender mainstreaming and gender units. The author examines, inter alia, the effects of equating “gender” with “women,” and the challenges involved in creating separate units to implement gender perspectives. Further, the report identifies and discusses the gender perspective at the core of many of these operations: one of militarized masculinity and state restoration. Recognizing the existence of these masculine discourses within such institutions (army and other state-building aspects), combined with the dilemmas of insecurity in the operative context, is central to analyzing and understanding the bottlenecks to gender mainstreaming and gender-sensitive approaches. Gender mainstreaming and implementation of Res. 1325 will remain at the rhetorical level unless major changes are made to the masculine, militarized architecture of peace operations.