EU Countries Providing Less Than 5 Percent of UN Peacekeeping Troops

Screen Shot 2014-09-03 at 9.09.26 PM

Oct. 25, 2016 –  EU countries are providing less than 5% of personnel for UN peacekeeping missions, according to the latest data from the Dept. of Peacekeeping Operations.

A summit chaired by Barack Obama in Sept. 2015 at UN headquarters was supposed to kickstart a return to United Nations peacekeeping by European countries, whose troops at one stage in the 1980s contributed 40 percent of peacekeeping forces.

But the amount of EU troops serving with UN missions has actually gone slightly down since that summit with less than 5 percent of the currently deployed 100,019 peacekeepers coming from the 28-nation bloc.

Just a little over a handful of EU countries are providing hundreds of peacekeepers for the UN’s 16 current peace operations, with the majority of EU states providing tens or less.

The top EU contributors are:

Italy 1,114
France 867
Spain 613
Germany 432
Ireland 385
Netherlands 358
Finland 340
United Kingdom 337

All other countries are providing less than 100 peacekeepers with most contributing less than 50.

The burden of peacekeeping is shared mostly by African and South Asian nations with six countries providing more than 40% of peacekeepers:

Ethiopia 8,236
India 7,471
Pakistan 7,161
Bangladesh 6,772
Rwanda 6,146
Nepal 5,131

For its part, the US provides a mere 68 personnel to UN peacekeeping, though remains by far the biggest financial contributor accounting for 28 percent of the total peacekeeping budget, which is just less than $8 billion for June 2016- June 2017.

China is by far the biggest contributor of troops among the permanent five members of the Security Council, providing 2,639 personnel. France is next, 867, followed by the UK, 337, Russia, 98, and US, 68.

Germany to Send Troops to Bolster UN Force in Mali

Jan. 28, 2016 – Germany’s parliament on Thursday voted to approve the deployment of a contingent of up to 650 troops to join the 12,000-strong UN stabilization mission in Mali (MINUSMA).

The first deployment will begin January 30 and full deployment is expected to be achieved by June and will make Berlin the third biggest European troop contributor to UN peacekeeping, behind Italy and Spain.

Germany was one of 50 countries that pledged some 30,000 additional troops to United Nations peacekeeping operations at a summit chaired by US President Barack Obama in September on the sidelines of the annual General Debate.

The United States is the biggest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping, followed by Japan, China, and Germany.

The deployment of the German troops will be the first time in 23 years that a UN peacekeeping mission has had a full German army contingent. The last time was in Somalia in the early 1990s, when a German contingent served with UNOSOM II.

Germany currently contributes small numbers to seven UN peacekeeping missions and one political mission, in Afghanistan, deploying about 250 personnel in total.

The UN force in Mali was established in April 2013 and subsumed an African-led peacekeeping mission.

The Mali mission has become one of the deadliest for UN peacekeepers with 73 troops losing their lives in service there, including 44 through malicious acts up to Dec. 31, 2015, according to information from the UN’s dept. of peacekeeping operations.

On Thursday, four Malian troops were killed in two separate incidents.

Al Qaeda-linked fighters took over the country’s north in 2012, including the historical city of Timbuktu.

A peace agreement was signed in June last year between Tuareg separatists, armed militias and the government.

European countries are keen to stabilize Mali because of the impact it has on the Sahel region in general and Libya in particular, which is a major transit route to EU countries for migrants and asylum-seekers fleeing violence and poverty.

The German troops will be deployed to Gao and will serve in various capacities including intelligence, logistics and force protection, according to information from Germany’s UN mission in New York.

- Denis Fitzgerald
@denisfitz

As Obama Heads to General Assembly, US Debt to UN Balloons to $3 Billion

US President Barack Obama Addresses the General Assembly, Sept. 24, 2014

US President Barack Obama Addresses the General Assembly, Sept. 24, 2014

Sept. 14, 1015 – US President Barack Obama will make his penultimate appearance at the United Nations later this month where he will address the annual General Debate and speak at a high-level summit where the sustainable development goals will be adopted.

Obama will also host a summit on increasing international involvement in UN peacekeeping. The United States is the biggest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping operations, assessed at 28 percent of the annual $8.25 billion budget – but DC hasn’t yet paid its contribution for 2015 and still has arrears from 2014.

In total, the US owes peacekeeping dues for 2014 and 2015 totaling more than $2 billion, according to information provided to UN Tribune from the United Nations budget office.

Washington also has yet to pay its 2015 dues to the UN’s regular budget. The United States is assessed at 22 percent of the regular budget for a total of $655 million for 2015. According to UN figures, the US owes a combined total of $926 million to the regular budget, which includes an outstanding $270 million from last year.

The United States is the only permanent member of the Security Council to not yet pay its 2015 dues, according to information from the UN Committee on Contributions website.

The US government’s fiscal year begins in October and large payments are typically made at the beginning of the fiscal cycle, though not nearly enough to cover the total back debt.

Information from the UN Budget Office on US debt to the United Nations

Information from the UN Budget Office on US debt to the United Nations (click to enlarge)

While many US lawmakers say that the United Nations is a bloated bureaucracy that offers little to no value for US citizens, this is far from the case from a strictly economic point of view. In fact, it is a boon to the New York City economy and to US companies.

Of the 43,000 staff working for the UN Secretariat, some 2,700 are US citizens, or 6.2% of the total staff. Japan, the second highest financial contributor, assessed at some $300 million to the annual budget, has a mere 167 staff members or 0.59%, according to the latest available Composition of the Secretariat report.

In addition, a 2010 report from UN Foundation showed that the UN Secretariat procured more than $832 million from US companies in 2010. The report also said that the economic benefit to New York City by having UN Headquarters located in the city is about $3.3bln annually.

While the US is the biggest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping, there are only 78 UN peacekeepers from the United States deployed in current peacekeeping operations.

- Denis Fitzgerald @denisfitz

Related Story: US, UK, France Tops for UN Secretariat Staff

EU Countries Combined Provide the Same Number of UN Peacekeepers as Nepal

arton843

Aug 24, 2015 – Latest figures from the UN Dept. of Peacekeeping Operations show that 24 of 28 EU member states provide police and troops to peacekeeping missions for a total current contribution of 5,204 peacekeepers.

That’s less than five percent of the current 104,000 troops deployed in 16 missions worldwide and less than the 5,332 peacekeepers that Nepal alone provides.

A majority of EU states provide only tens of peacekeepers while others are in the low hundreds.

The top five EU troop contributing countries to UN peace operations are:

Italy – 1,111
France – 906
Netherlands – 681
Spain – 616
Ireland – 371

Bulgaria, Latvia, Luxembourg and Malta are the four EU countries that are currently not providing any troops to UN missions.

Among those providing the least peacekeepers are Cyprus, 2, Portugal, 3, Belgium, 5, Czech Republic, 13, and Croatia, 15.

Permanent UN Security Council member the UK provides 287 peacekeepers, which is less than fellow permanent member France but significantly more than Russia, 76, and the US, 78. China leads the way among permanent members providing 3,078 troops. The US is the biggest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping.

While Sweden is a strong supporter of the UN, it does not make the top five for contributing personnel to peacekeeping with a total current contribution of 279 police and troops combined. Fellow Nordic countries Finland and Denmark are providing 338 and 49 peacekeepers respectively. Non EU-member Norway is providing 97 peacekeepers.

Germany, which has aspirations of a permanent Security Council seat, provides 175 peacekeepers to current UN missions while neighbors Austria are contributing 191 personnel.

The tiny Baltic countries Estonia and Lithuania are providing four and 43 peacekeepers respectively.

The burden of peacekeeping is shared among South Asian and African nations with Bangladesh currently the top contributor, providing 9,398 peacekeepers, followed by Ethiopia, 8,309, India, 7,960, Pakistan, 7,665, and Rwanda, 5,600.

A summit on providing troops to peacekeeping operations will be held during the 70th General Assembly which opens in September.

- Denis Fitzgerald
On Twitter @denisfitz

Impunity Fueling Sexual Abuse and Exploitation by UN Peacekeepers

arton843

June 11, 2015 – When UN peacekeepers commit acts of sexual abuse and exploitation, they do so knowing that their crimes have every chance of never being punished.

Under the current system, when a country contributes troops to a peacekeeping mission, it enters into an understanding with the United Nations that it will pursue cases of misconduct by its troops and report back to the UN, but in reality the UN has no way to enforce this and, at present, no way to sanction troop contributing countries (TCCs) who fail to act on cases of misconduct.

As it stands, the UN merely has administrative jurisdiction over its military contingents. Under the Status of Forces Agreement, which the UN negotiates with the the host state, each TCC retains exclusive jurisdiction to prosecute and otherwise discipline its military personnel. This immunity cannot be waived by the Secretary-General since jurisdiction is exclusive to the TCC (the immunity can be waived in the case of UN employees).

Most militaries have a poor record of holding their personnel accountable for violations. In the majority of cases, perpetrators are sent home – sometimes to a state where there is no legislation for sexual crimes or where such crimes are not taken seriously – and no further action is taken.

Similarly, when women give birth to babies fathered by UN peacekeepers, the United Nations policy is to assist the mother in making a claim for financial support but that claim is then forwarded to the troop contributing country for consideration. NGOs have called for the UN to establish a Trust Fund for victims and children who are born to peacekeepers, but no action has been taken on this.

While it’s unlikely that troop contributing countries will cede jurisdiction for their troops, the UN could enforce sanctions on troop contributing countries who fail to act on cases of misconduct such as barring them from future UN missions and garnishing pay of peacekeepers who father children while on duty. What is lacking right now is the will to push through such measures but if the UN is to live up to its promise, the Secretariat, member states and troop contributing countries must all do a lot more to eliminate sexual abuse and exploitation from UN peacekeeping.

- Denis Fitzgerald
On Twitter @denisfitz

UN Mali Mission Fast Becoming Deadliest Ever for Peacekeepers

MINUSMA troops carry casket of fallen Nigerian peacekeepers killed in Oct. 2014 ambush (UN Photo).

MINUSMA troops carry caskets of fallen Nigerian peacekeepers killed in Oct. 2014 ambush (UN Photo).

March 10, 2015 – The two-year old UN peacekeeping mission in Mail suffered its thirty-sixth fatality through a malicious act over the weekend when a United Nations base was hit by rocket fire on Sunday in an attack that injured another 11 blue helmets along with three civilians.

The killed peacekeeper was the eighteenth from Chad to lose his life serving with MINUSMA, the 12,000-strong mission that was established in April 2013. In addition to the 36 peacekeepers killed in action, another ten have lost their lives through accidents or illness serving in Mali.

Of the 16 current UN peacekeeping missions, the UN Interim Force in Lebanon has suffered the most fatalities since its establishment in 1978 with a total of 308 blue helmets losing their lives since then, with 93 of those killed in action (another 130 more were killed in accidents, according to UN data).

But only one UNIFIL peacekeeper has been killed in action in the past seven years – that was in late January when a Spanish soldier was hit by Israeli artillery fire.

At the current rate of two peacekeeping fatalities per month from attacks on the force, MINUSMA is on track to become the most dangerous mission ever for UN peacekeepers.

Among the other current dangerous missions for blue helmets are Darfur, where 69 troops have been killed in action since 2008, and DRC, where 43 blue helmets have been killed since 2001 in what the UN terms malicious acts.

Congo was the site of the first UN peacekeeping mission with significant military force when ONUC was established in 1960. The mission was in place for five years and the 135 peacekeepers killed in action over that span is the most ever for a blue-helmeted force.

Countries that Have Lost Most Troops Serving with UN Peacekeeping Forces:
1. India – 158
2. Nigeria – 144
3. Pakistan – 137
4. Ghana – 133
5. Bangladesh – 123
6. Canada – 122
7. France – 111
8. UK – 103
9. Ethiopia – 98
10. Ireland – 90

Source
: UN Peacekeeping

- Denis Fitzgeald
On Twitter @denisfitz

Book Review: UN-Tied Nations: The United Nations, Peacekeeping & Global Governance


Screen Shot 2014-11-18 at 10.41.00 PM
Nov. 18, 2014 – Kate Seaman’s UN-Tied Nations: The United Nations, Peacekeeping and Global Governance examines the role of peacekeeping in the development of global security governance. It is a timely book in light of Ban Ki-moon’s recent announcement of a high-level panel to review UN peacekeeping operations.

Seaman begins with a discussion of the various theories and definitions of what constitutes global governance. “The reality is that global governance is not a form of world government… [it] is a highly contested and politicized concept. It does not view the international system as a state centric one, instead it tries to incorporate the many new and varied actors that now have a role to play in global governance.” These include non-governmental organizations, advocacy groups and regional organizations.

At the center of all this is the United Nations which plays a “coordinating” role in the global governance agenda, promoting “key norms such as human rights, democratization and good governance.” The hope after the end of the Cold War was that a reinvigorated UN would live up to its charter ideals of promoting peace and human rights, even though United Nations membership is – or at least according to the UN Charter – open only to “peace-loving states.”

There was a burst of Security Council activity in the early to mid-1990s with a record number of decisions, but the organization soon became “overwhelmed” and failed to respond in Rwanda and Somalia. It became readily apparent that “traditional peacekeeping” was inadequate to cope with new challenges and “coupled with ‘the desire by UN officials and member states to pick winners and avoid failures meant that the UN was as interested in its own security as it was in human security’.”

Moreover, ambitious Security Council mandates tasked peacekeepers with a range of duties such as from early economic recovery to election monitoring, but the mandates were not matched with the resources to fulfill them and there was a disconnect between the demands placed on peacekeepers and their ability to perform these tasks.

The past decade has seen a resurgence in UN peacekeeping operations but the same problems and challenges remain: legitimacy and resources, coupled with new challenges in tackling the changing nature of conflicts with non-state actors increasingly involved.

The book examines a number of case studies and thoroughly reviews the existing literature on global governance and peacekeeping. There are useful insights from the author’s interviews with UN officials and diplomats – their anonymity allows more candidness than one is used to from diplomats and secretariat officials in their public remarks.

Perennial problems such as reform of the Council is also discussed with observations ranging from an expanded Council would only lead to an even more crippling decision making process to ensuring major troop contributing countries have a say in decisions. There’s something of a consensus, however, on that improving the Council’s working methods should be as much, if not more, of a priority than reforming the Council’s existing structure.

In concluding, Seaman writes that, “The UN has simply become another political tool of governments, used to validate their actions and policies… if the UN is ever to achieve the ideals on which it was established, member states will have to be much more willing to provide resources and to politically support the organization and the Secretariat in what they are trying to achieve.”

- Denis Fitzgerald
On Twitter @denisfitz

Al Nusrah Issue Demands for Release of Fijian Golan Peacekeepers

UNDOF troops in June during a visit of undersecretary-general for peacekeeping ops, Herve Ladsous. source: UNDOF

UNDOF troops in June during a visit of undersecretary-general for peacekeeping ops, Herve Ladsous. credit: UNDOF

Sept. 1, 2014 – The Al Nusrah Front is demanding that it be removed from the UN’s sanctions list, wants compensation for three of its fighters killed, and that they be provided with humanitarian aid in return for releasing the Fijian peacekeepers the group abducted last week in the Golan Heights.

Fijian Brigadier General Mosese Tikoitoga revealed the three demands at a press conference in Fiji earlier where he also said that he was assured that the abducted peacekeepers, whose number was put at 45 by the Fiji Times, are in good health.

Al Nusrah were added to the Security Council’s sanctions list last month.

Meanwhile, Philipines Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gregorio Pio Catapang has said his troops defied an order from an UNDOF commander to hand over their weapons in exchange for the release of the Fijian troops.

- Denis Fitzgerald
On Twitter @denisfitz

Fijian Peacekeepers Still Detained, Filipino Troops in Armed Standoff are Rescued

UNDOF
Aug. 29, 2014 – The UN continues to seek the release of the the Fijian peacekeepers detained in the Golan Heights and on Friday updated the number held hostage to 44.

Meanwhile, Filipino troops who were surrounded by armed elements have been evacuated to the peacekeeping mission’s headquarters in Golan in an operation aided by Irish peacekeepers.

The UN of Friday put the number of Filipino troops trapped at 72.

“Irish personnel secured a route, provided security as UNDOF troops withdrew from a UN position and escorted them to the Force Headquarters in Camp Faouar,” said a statement posted on the Irish Defence Forces website.

It is not yet known if all 72 troops have been evacuated.

The 44 Fijian troops detained by an armed group, believed to be Al Nusra, were first taken to a UN post staffed by Filipino troops, a source who had been briefed on the situation told UN Tribune. There the Filipino troops were threatened and ordered to hand over their weapons. The Filipino contingent managed to escape to another UN position and it is there they were surrounded by the armed elements who had also captured UN vehicles.

The UN is not aware of where the captive Fijian troops are being held or if all 44 are being held at the same location, a source said.

A spokesperson for the UN’s Dept. of Peacekeeping Operations declined to comment citing the sensitive nature of the ongoing situation.

Update: The UN spokesperson’s office late Friday sent the following statement to reporters:

The United Nations has received assurances from credible sources that the 44 peacekeepers from the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) who were taken from their position on the morning of Thursday, 28 August, are safe and in good health.  UNDOF has not yet had direct contact with these peacekeepers.

“UNDOF has been informed that the intention behind those holding the peacekeepers was to remove them from an active battlefield to a safe area for their own protection.”

- Denis Fitzgerald
On Twitter @denisfitz

New Books on the ICC, Agenda Setting, and Irish Peacekeepers

photo (32)
Aug. 18, 2014 – Three new books look at the power politics at play in the UN with respect to the International Criminal Court, the global advocacy movement, and UN peacekeeping.

In David Bosco’s rigorous account of the first ten years of the ICC, Rough Justice, the evolution of the Court is examined alongside the evolving role played by major powers, primarily the United States, but also including China, India and Russia – who were, and who mostly still are, distrustful of the Court, along with other powers who are mostly supporters of the Court – Brazil, Britain, France, Germany and South Africa.

Bosco notes that the US actively petitioned other countries to not ratify the Rome Statute but later abstained in a 2005 UN Security Council vote referring the situation in Sudan to the ICC (He also writes that later all permanent members of the Council were against the ICC indicting Sudanese Pres. Bashir). In 2011, the US voted for Resolution 1970 referring the situation in Libya to the Court, but the Council have not, as Bosco reminds us, included an enforcement mechanism or allocated funds for the investigations in both these cases.

While the Council has referred situations to the ICC, when the authors of the Goldstone Report on Israel’s invasion of Gaza in 2008 concluded that the violations “fall within the subject-matter jurisdictions of the International Criminal Court,” Bosco writes that then US envoy to the UN Susan Rice “privately emphasized to Israeli President Shimon Peres the US ‘commitment not to allow the issue to move from the Security Council to the International Criminal Court.’”

He adds that there is mounting evidence that the Court prefers to avoid situations involving big powers, citing Afghanistan as another example.

Among his conclusions on the first ten years of the ICC, Bosco writes that “the court has, for the most part, become a toolkit of major powers responding to instability and violence in weaker states” but so far there is little evidence that is has altered “political power realities.”

However, “the failure of the US-led marginalization campaign and other efforts to delay or defer court processes on political grounds signal that even major powers are limited in their ability to challenge frontally justice processes that have begun… however, that inability may have opened space for less obvious mechanisms for control.”

Charil Carpenter’s Lost Causes is concerned with what issues get promoted by “global advocacy elites.” As just one instance, she notes that “internal wars are an important concern for conflict prevention analysts but gangs and urban violence are on the margins of the global security agenda” (yet most armed violence occurs in countries not in armed conflict).

Carpenter’s book is sub-titled ‘Agenda Vetting in Global Issue Networks and the Shaping of Human Security’ and her theory, which she expounds on with several examples, is that advocacy elites choose issues not based “on their merits, or mandate, or the wider political context, but partly on calculations about the structure of their institutional relationships – to other actors, to other issues.”

The material is at times dense but the book is well organized and the topics the author chooses to illuminate her theory are well chosen, and it provides good insight into how the UN, particularly the Security Council and the Office for the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs, adopt positions. Carpenter writes that one advocate campaigning for compensation to families of civilians killed in conflict was advised not to contact the human rights officers at UN missions, who are mostly delegated to the UN’s third, or human rights, committee at the General Assembly, but instead to contact the person responsible for protection of civilians as these individuals are engaged with the Security Council which holds regular thematic debates on protection of civilians.

Michael Kennedy and Art Magennis’s Ireland, the United Nations and the Congo is a thoroughly researched account of the UN’s early peacekeeping forays using the experience of Ireland’s 6,200 troops contribution to the 1960 peacekeeping deployment to the Congo, ONUC.

Some of the insights are familiar to those who follow UN peacekeeping. That the government deploying the troops was more concerned about elevating its position and rank in the UN system than the welfare of the troops or the potential for success of the mission.

The book also examines the role of then secretary-general Dag Hammarskjold, the iconic Swede who later lost his life in a plane crash over Zambia which is still being investigated. “He had maintained strict overall command of ONUC and emerges from UN records on Congo and from his personal papers not as the neutral international servant with a ‘halo’ which is visible for a considerable distance,’ but as a calculating pro-Western and at times Machiavellian operator.”

The book is meticulously researched and while it examines events fifty years ago, there are many parallels to current debates on peacekeeping such as peace-enforcement, cover-ups of atrocities committed by blue helmets and the political calculations of troop contributing countries.

- Denis Fitzgerald
On Twitter @denisfitz