UN Peacekeeping doctrine in a new era

UN Peacekeeping Doctrine in a New Era: Adapting to Stabilisation, Protection and New Threats

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.

The European Union and Peacebuilding

The Rising Powers and Peacebuilding project seeks to address an important question that has not yet been thoroughly researched: what are the new approaches that rising powers have taken to peacebuilding, how do they differ from those of traditional powers and multilateral institutions, and what lessons can be learned from these new approaches?The policy briefs in this series provide a baseline on the roles of rising powers and their affiliated regional organizations in peacebuilding. To this point, little research has been conducted on the substance and impact of peacebuilding activities carried out by rising powers. This project seeks to address this gap in the research by providing a structured, critical analysis of the values, content and impact of recent peacebuilding initiatives of rising powers, comparing them to one another and to approaches by Western donors and international organizations. The project also aims to offer new theoretical claims about the role of the global South in peacebuilding, rooted in insightful empirical work (on Somalia, Afghanistan and Myanmar and on specific non-¬‐Western actors), and to make key policy audiences aware of alternative approaches and their empirical records and theoretical underpinnings (which may vary among values, global/regional power aspirations, bureaucratic approaches).The project partners will also produce case studies on the role of rising powers in peacebuilding, and include:ACCORD (an NGO based in South Africa), the Istanbul Policy Center (IPC), , the United Service Institution of India (USI), American University’s School of International Service (SIS), CSIS-¬‐Jakarta, and the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI). The project is funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, American University, and NUPI.

Understanding peacebuilding as essentially local

MINUSTAH’s Specialized Police Team to Combat Sexual Violence in Haiti

This paper examines the Norwegian specialized police team (SPT) that has been deployed to the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) since late 2010. The objective of the team is to build the capacity of the Haitian National Police (HNP) to conduct investigations into sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV).

Between self-interest and solidarity: Norway’s return to UN Peacekeeping?

Norway has been a firm supporter of, and contributor to, UN peacekeeping operations. However, while increasing its financial support since the end of the Cold War, Norway has significantly downscaled its troop contributions to the UN, focusing on NATO operations. Rather than interpreting this as lessened interest in the UN, we point out that support and commitment cannot be measured solely in numbers of troops deployed. Norway’s commitment to UN peacekeeping should be understood as part of its strategic culture, here read as a synthesis between self-interest and solidarity, and between the UN and NATO. This article details the institutional, political and material challenges and opportunities for renewed engagement in UN peacekeeping.

Synthesis Report: Reviewing UN Peace Operations, the UN Peacebuilding Architecture and the Implementation of UNSCR 1325

In 2015, three reviews in the field of Peace and Security were undertaken: the UN peace operations review, the review of the UN Peace building Architecture and the review of the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1325. These reviews reflect the acknowledgement that the changing dynamics of conflict in the world necessitates a revision of the UN’s tools in order for the organisation to maintain its relevance and ability to meet these challenges. This report presents the key recommendations as well as common themes across the reviews. The common themes are: the changing nature of conflict; the importance of the women, peace and security agenda for the UN’s work;the primacy of prevention and the need for a long-term focus; the necessity to shift towards people-centred, inclusive processes; the primacy of politics; the need for field focus and context awareness; the privileging of the military response to violent conflict is counterproductive; partnership with other actorsis important; leadership and professionalisation of the UN is needed; and a call for stronger UN system coherence. It ends by offering some recommendations to the current and next UN Secretary General.

Rethinking the Humanitarian-Development Nexus

In this policy brief, the author outlines the first steps taken in the rethinking of the humanitarian-development nexus. The next Secretary-General would be advised to continue on the same path in order to make sure that the recent commitments made by member states and expressed in various documents are realised. The author sums up five areas the next Secretary-General should prioritize. This policy brief is to a large extent based on the seminar titled Rethinking the humanitarian-development nexus, which was held at NUPI on 15 March 2016. The seminar was co-organised by NUPI, the Norwegian Centre for Humanitarian Studies and the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as part of the UN 70: A new Agenda project.

The Human Rights Pillar of the United Nations: Challenges and the Way Ahead

Last year the United Nations (UN) turned 70 years old, and this year marks the tenth anniversary of the Human Rights Council and the 50th anniversary of the two international human rights covenants. As the organisation is in the process of choosing its ninth Secretary-General, who will take office on 1st January 2017, it is timely to take stock of the UN human rights pillar and to identify areas that can be improved in order to make this pillar more suited for fulfilling its intended purpose and for dealing with contemporary challenges. This policy brief offers suggestions as to what the next UN Secretary-General can do to consolidate and strengthen the human rights pillar.

Between doctrine and practice: The United Nations peacekeeping dilemma

Peace Enforcement in Africa: Doctrinal distinctions between the African Union and United Nations

When the United Nations (UN) Security Council needs to authorize a peace enforcement operation in Africa, its partner of choice is the African Union (AU). Africa has developed significant peace operations capacity over the past decade. In addition to deploying eight AU operations, Africa now contributes 50% of all UN peacekeepers. African stability operations, like its mission in Somalia, are often described as peace enforcement operations. In this article, the author questions whether it is accurate to categorize African stability operations as peace enforcement? This article answers the question by considering what the criteria are that are used to differentiate between peace enforcement and peacekeeping operations in the UN context. The author then uses the peace enforcement criteria to assess whether AU stabilization operations would qualify as peace enforcement operations. In conclusion, he considers the implications of the findings for the strategic partnership between the AU and the UN.

Towards UN counter-terrorism operations?

The United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operation in Mali (MINUSMA) has become among the deadliest in UN history, suffering from attacks by violent extremists and terrorists. There are strong calls to give UN peacekeeping operations more robust mandates and equip them with the necessary capabilities, guidelines and training to be able to take on limited stabilisation and counter-terrorism tasks. This article conceptually develops UN counter-terrorism operations as a heuristic device, and compares this with the mandate and practices of MINUSMA. It examines the related implications of this development, and concludes that while there may be good practical as well as short-term political reasons for moving in this direction, the shift towards UN counter-terrorism operations will undermine the UN’s international legitimacy, its role as an impartial conflict arbiter, and its tools in the peace and security toolbox more broadly, such as UN peacekeeping operations and special political missions.

New Strategies for Old Conflicts? Lessons in Stabilisation from the Democratic Republic of Congo