Reports: U.S. Government Peacekeeping Issues

  • Empowering Local Peacebuilders
    United States Institute of Peace
    Published March 26, 2012

    Summary

    Problem Identified
    Peacebuilding operations in conflict and post-conflict societies often undermine local capacity, ownership, and sustainability. The acknowledged remedy is to empower local actors to take the lead in planning and implementing programs, but few empowerment strategies that work in practice have been documented and explained.

    Action Taken
    - Several organizations have reconfigured empowerment techniques traditionally used for peacetime development to work in societies emerging from conflict.
    - Local actors have seized the chance presented by these new approaches to develop and implement their own creative solutions to conflict. Local ownership has in turn enabled the integration of other sectors of society and government into peacebuilding activities.

    Lessons Learned
    - Focus on facilitating processes instead of trying to achieve specific outcomes. Successful interventions help participants open channels to defend their own interests, with the participants determining the final decisions and outcomes.
    - Design programs to promote learning rather than to yield specific results. Effective programs create opportunities for participants to seek out and absorb knowledge critical to good decision making.
    - Don’t be deflected by political pressures. Even well-known empowerment principles (such as respecting local counterparts) can be sidelined if interveners do not prioritize them above the kinds of political pressures typically encountered in conflict zones.

    PoC with Responsibility to Protect, Peacekeeping Doctrine, Protection of Civilians, Security Sector Reform, All Regions, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted March 26, 2012
  • Peace Operations Partnerships: Complex but Necessary Cooperation
    By Richard Gowan and Jake Sherman
    Center for International Peace Operations
    Published March 19, 2012

    In a short paper for the Center for International Peace Operations, the German think-tank, Jake Sherman and Richard Gowan argue that as NATO pulls back from Afghanistan and the UN downsizes some missions (including those in Haiti and the Congo) organizations including the AU, Arab League and ASEAN may take more responsibility for new peace operations.

    In cases including Afghanistan, Kosovo, Somalia and the Congo, multiple organizations are working together to consolidate stability and build functioning states. Although NATO and the UN are the main actors in global peace operations today, it is likely that a variety of other organizations including the African Union (AU), the Arab League and the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) will play an increasingly prominent role in the future. These actors will need a great deal of help, ranging from military assistance to administrative back-up. The UN, NATO and EU will be called upon to play significant supporting roles. Managing these complex partnerships will be essential to making existing and new peace operations succeed.

    African Union Peacekeeping, NATO & EU Peacekeeping, Peacekeeping Doctrine, Protection of Civilians, Security Sector Reform, All Regions, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted March 19, 2012
  • Peace Operations Partnerships: Assessing Cooperation Mechanisms between Secretariats
    By Joachim Koops
    Center for International Peace Operations
    Published March 16, 2012

    During the last decade, peace operation partnerships between the United Nations (UN) and regional organizations have advanced considerably both in operational and institutional terms. With the growing involvement of regional organizations in the area of peacekeeping, coordination between the UN and its potential partners is important in order to avoid duplication or outright inter-organizational rivalry. Recognizing that institutionalised relations between the UN and emerging peacekeeping actors such as the European Union (EU), African Union (AU) and even NATO can lead to beneficial burdensharing and mutual reinforcement, organizations have made conscious efforts to move from ad-hoc cooperation to more permanent and predictable mechanisms. Effective peace operations partnerships depend on coherent and strategically structured relations at the inter-secretariat level: different organizational cultures, agendas and approaches need to be systematically integrated. Despite some progress in UN-EU, UN-AU and UN-NATO relations, significant challenges persist in designing, maintaining and improving interorganizational schemes for peace operations.

    African Union Peacekeeping, NATO & EU Peacekeeping, Peacekeeping Doctrine, All Regions, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted March 19, 2012
  • U.S. Engagement in International Peacekeeping: From Aspiration to Implementation
    By Partnership for Effective Peacekeeping
    The PEP
    Published October 19, 2011

    Citizens for Global Solutions, as part of the Partnership for Effective Peacekeeping, has released a new report entitled, "U.S. Engagement in International Peacekeeping: From Aspiration to Implementation." The report calls on Congress and the Obama Administration to improve U.S. participation in international peacekeeping operations and offers recommendations in four areas:

    1) U.S. funding of U.N. peacekeeping
    2) Women in peacekeeping
    3) Training and Equipping Peacekeepers
    4) Standing Civilian and Police Capacity

    Download the report below, or visit Citizens for Global Solutions' website for more information. 

    United States, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted October 19, 2011
  • Partners in Preventive Action: The U.S. and International Institutions
    By Paul B. Stares and Micah Zenko
    Council on Foreign Relations
    Published September 1, 2011

    Overview

    The unipolar moment, to the extent it ever existed, has now truly passed. The United States is part of a globalized world, in which the flows of goods, finance, people, and much more connect us to other countries as never before. But for all the myriad benefits globalization brings, it also means that the challenges of the coming decades—be they generated by resource competition, climate change, cybercrime, terrorism, or clas­sic competition and rivalry—cannot be solved or even mitigated by one country alone. Countries will need to cooperate on policies that extend across borders to address issues that affect them all.

    In this Council Special Report, CFR scholars Paul B. Stares and Micah Zenko argue that the United States should increasingly look to international institutions—the United Nations and regional organiza­tions like the European Union, the African Union, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations—as partners in conflict prevention and peacemaking worldwide. These organizations can serve as a platform for developing and enforcing international norms; provide a source of legitimacy for diplomatic and military efforts; and aggregate the opera­tional resources of their members, all of which can increase the ease and effectiveness of American peacemaking efforts.

    All Regions, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted November 16, 2011
  • Security Council Cross-Cutting Report: Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict
    Published July 20, 2011

    In addition to reviewing developments relating to protection of civilians as a thematic issue on the Security Council’s agenda, including in the context of UN peacekeeping, the present report includes a statistical analysis of Council decisions in country-specific situations in 2010 and how protection issues were addressed. The Secretary-General’s reporting on protection of civilians, as well as the Council’s use of sanctions against individuals or entities committing violations against civilians are
    also reviewed. The two case studies —on Côte d’Ivoire and Libya—are actually from 2011. They were included, however, because of their obvious importance. They offer contrasting perspectives on recent Council action to protect civilians and a more in-depth and comprehensive analysis than what the statistical analysis is able to provide.

    African Union Peacekeeping, PoC with Responsibility to Protect, NATO & EU Peacekeeping, Peacekeeping Doctrine, Protection of Civilians, Security Sector Reform, All Regions, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted July 20, 2011
  • Choosing defense mission priorities
    By Dr. Gordon Adams, Matthew Leatherman and Hans-Inge Langø
    Henry L. Stimson Center
    Published November 17, 2010

    Excerpt:

    It is time to discipline the defense budget, along with the rest of the federal budget. Americans understand the logic of fiscal discipline.  Spending less requires doing less.  Doing less requires setting priorities.  Setting priorities means having clear options and a strategy for managing risk.

    Over the past decade, U.S. defense spending has grown to roughly $700 billion a year, higher in real dollars than any year since WWII and equal as a percentage of the federal budget to that taken by Social Security, or income-based entitlements, or domestic discretionary spending.  Today we face pressing problems of jobs and economic recovery, along with unprecedented debts and deficits. ADM Michael Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has rightly noted that today the “single-biggest threat to our national security is our national debt.”

    Security Sector Reform, United States, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted November 17, 2010
  • Countering Terrorism in East Africa: The U.S. Response
    By Lauren Ploch
    Congressional Research Service (CRS)
    Published November 3, 2010

    Summary

    The United States government has implemented a range of programs to counter violent extremist threats in East Africa in response to Al Qaeda’s bombing of the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998 and subsequent transnational terrorist activity in the region. These programs include regional and bilateral efforts, both military and civilian. The programs seek to build regional intelligence, military, law enforcement, and judicial capacities; strengthen aviation, port, and border security; stem the flow of terrorist financing; and counter the spread of extremist ideologies. Current U.S.-led regional counterterrorism efforts include the State Department’s East Africa Regional Strategic Initiative (EARSI) and the U.S. military’s Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA), part of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM). The United States has also provided significant assistance in support of the African Union’s (AU) peace operations in Somalia, where the country’s nascent security forces and AU peacekeepers face a complex insurgency waged by, among others, Al Shabaab, a local group linked to Al Qaeda that often resorts to terrorist tactics. The State Department reports that both Al Qaeda and Al Shabaab pose serious terrorist threats to the United States and U.S. interests in the region. Evidence of linkages between Al Shabaab and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, across the Gulf of Aden in Yemen, highlight another regional dimension of the threat posed by violent extremists in the area.

    Congress has appropriated increasing counterterrorism assistance for Africa over the past decade, and has demonstrated continued interest in both the nature of the terrorist threat and efforts to counter it through hearings, investigations, and legislation. Questions have been raised regarding

    • the level of U.S. funding and personnel dedicated to these efforts;
    • the underlying assumptions on which these programs have been developed;
    • cooperation between implementing agencies; and
    • the extent to which U.S. programs actually prevent or mitigate radicalization,
    • recruitment, and support for violent extremist organizations.

    This report provides an overview of current U.S. counterterrorism assistance programs and influence operations in East Africa and explores some of the strategies underpinning them. It also provides a brief description of the evolving terrorist threat in the region. The security cooperation and civil affairs activities of the U.S. military in the region have grown substantially in the past decade, primarily in response to these threats, and the report explores the various roles of the Departments of State, Defense, Homeland Security, Treasury, Justice, and the U.S. Agency for International Development, among other agencies, in implementing counterterrorism and counterextremism programs in the region. The report does not address covert or clandestine operations to collect intelligence or capture or eliminate terrorist targets in the region.

    Related legislation includes several bills introduced in the aftermath of the July 2010 Kampala bombings: H.Con.Res. 303, H.Res. 1538, H.Res. 1596, and H.Res. 1708, as well as S.Res. 573, on Somalia; S. 3757, on Ethiopia; and H.Res. 1708, on Eritrea. For further information, see CRS Report R41070, Al Qaeda and Affiliates: Historical Perspective, Global Presence, and Implications for U.S. Policy, coordinated by John Rollins; CRS Report RL33911, Somalia: Current Conditions and Prospects for a Lasting Peace, by Ted Dagne; and CRS Report RL34003, Africa Command: U.S. Strategic Interests and the Role of the U.S. Military in Africa, by Lauren Ploch.

    Africa, African Union Peacekeeping, Security Sector Reform, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted November 19, 2010
  • Private Contractors in Conflict Zones: The Good, the Bad, and the Strategic Impact
    By T.X. Hammes
    Institute for National Strategic Studies
    Published October 28, 2010

    "There has been very little investigation by the U.S. Government into the strategic impact of contractors.  Yet contractors reduce the political capital necessary to commit U.S. forces to war, impact the legitimacy of a counterinsurgency effort, and reduce its perceived morality.  These factors attack the Nation's critical vulnerability in an irregular war - the political will of the American people." - Strategic Forum #260

    The United States has hired record numbers of contractors to serve in the conflict zones of Iraq and Afghanistan but has not seriously examined their strategic impact.  There are clearly advantages to using contractors in conflict zones, but they have three inherent characteristics that have srious negative effects during counterinsurgency operations. 

    As of March 31, 2010, the United States deployed 175,000 troops and 207,000 contractors in the war zones.  Contractors represented 50 percent of the Department of Defense (DOD) workforce in Iraq and 59 percent in Afghanistan.  These numbers include both armed and unarmed contractors.  The presence of contractors on the battlefield is obviously not a new phenomenon but has dramatically increased from the ratio of 1 contractor to 55 military personnel in Vietnam to 1:1 in the Iraq and 1.43:1 in Afghanistan.

    In this new Strategic Forum, Dr. T.X. Hammes explores the question "Does using contractors in a conflict zone make strategic sense?"

    African Union Peacekeeping, NATO & EU Peacekeeping, Security Sector Reform, All Regions, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted October 28, 2010
  • Enhancing Civilian Protection in Peace Operations: Insights from Africa
    By Paul Williams
    Africa Center for Strategic Studies
    Published September 21, 2010

    Recent incidents of systematic rapes in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and continued mass dislocations of populations in Somalia and Sudan have again thrust the issue of international peace operations’ responsibility for providing civilian protection onto news headlines around the world. With 40 peace operations in 14 countries since 2000, Africa is at the forefront of grappling with the civilian protection issue. 

    In this ACSS Research Paper, Paul Williams assesses the role civilian protection plays in peace operations, lessons learned from past civilian protection efforts, progress that has been made, and key obstacles that remain in effectively providing protection to civilians caught up in armed conflict.  Drawing on this experience, the paper puts forth ten priorities for improving civilian protection in ongoing and future peace operations – in Africa and beyond. 

    ACSS's Research Papers present policy-relevant analysis on topics of pressing importance to Africa’s security.  

    Africa, African Union Peacekeeping, Protection of Civilians, UN Peace Operations, US Gov't Peacekeeping Issues | Posted September 21, 2010

Privacy Policy  |  Sitemap  |  Contact Us  |  Submit Content

The Partnership for Effective Peacekeeping is a project of Refugees International, Citizens for Global Solutions and Better World Campaign. Refugees International serves as the secretariat for the PEP.

The Partnership for Effective Peacekeeping • 2001 S St NW, Suite 700 • Washington, DC • 20009
Phone:
202-540-7014 • Fax: 202-828-0819 • michael@refugeesinternational.org 

Copyright © Refugees International. All Rights Reserved.
Built by Firefly Partners firefly