 |
|
GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY INITIATIVE TO CREATE A LARGE-SCALE, UNARMED PEACEFORCE AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS FINALLY COME? By Rolf C. Carriere |
|
Executive Summary The notion of peacekeeping usually conjures up images of UN-sponsored Blue Helmets or other armed military or police forces deployed in areas of violent conflict in poor countries. But unarmed peacekeeping by civilian members of global non-governmental organizations who employ proven strategies is a valuable, cost-effective alternative (or complement) to the currently dominant approach of armed peacekeeping. They offer services of protective accompaniment and ‘presence’, monitoring, creating neutral safe spaces, and inter-positioning. As such, they provide a much-needed, benign, disciplined, professional force for peace, steeped in the best tradition of theory and praxis of non-violent conflict transformation—and an indispensable addition to the peacebuilder’s toolbox. After analyzing why unarmed peacekeeping has hitherto remained under-used and under-recognized, this article argues the urgent case for scaling up unarmed civilian peacekeeping at a time when (1) the global peace architecture is being revamped, (2) the high cost of armed peacekeeping is placing a limit on the use of that mode of conflict management/resolution, and (3) the present and future need for peacekeeping is likely to soar if the international community is to act effectively on the new global ‘responsibility to protect’ norm. What can you say YES to when you say NO to war? Unarmed civilian peacekeeping! |
| People around the world are calling for alternatives to military intervention. Given the changed nature of violent conflicts, their high human and economic cost, and the resulting humanitarian crises, interest is growing to try out a variety of effective peacekeeping methods. Attention has recently turned toward larger-scale, unarmed peacekeeping efforts initiated by civil society organizations, undertaken independently or in association with pertinent UN agencies. Now that the UN and the international community are working to redesign the global peace-and-development architecture, greater use of unarmed civilian peacekeeping holds out the promise of a more integrated, balanced and benign response to crises, at once advancing the causes of development, security and human rights. Nonviolent Peaceforce: An Alternative to Military Intervention The Nonviolent Peaceforce (NP), conceived at the 1999 Hague Appeal for Peace and founded as an international federation of 93 member organizations operating in six continents, is unique in its aspiration to increase the scale, scope and professionalism of multinational, civilian, unarmed peacekeeping, on a strictly non-partisan basis. NP uses specific, proven methodologies of nonviolence, including protective accompaniment, protective presence, creating safe & neutral spaces for local peace-building, inter-positioning, and monitoring. Its rationale, niche and modalities were the subject of an extensive feasibility study in 2001. Two years later, NP fielded its first team of peacekeepers, in Sri Lanka, and used the experience to fine-tune its operational systems and policies. Other projects currently under negotiation or implementation include Mindanao/Philippines, Northern Uganda/Southern Sudan, Colombia and Palestine/Israel. As a matter of principle, NP insists on being invited by local civil society groups, at times also operating in partnership with one or more UN agencies. Project approval by NP's International Governing Board will be considered only after thorough screening . Over the past 3 years, NP has demonstrated the effectiveness of unarmed, professional civilian peacekeeping in Sri Lanka and elsewhere. In order to meet the growing demand for its human security work, support is now needed to help enhance its technical and logistical capacity to provide civilians trained and ready for deployment on short notice. In fact, NP is receiving many more requests for fielding peacekeepers than current funding prospects allow. Since mid-2006 the Nonviolent Peaceforce has begun the process of recruiting, screening, training and holding in ready reserve 500 peacekeepers for dispatch to areas of conflict under partnership arrangements with UN agencies, regional and local organizations, and with the invitation or consent of the parties to the conflict. It is the first phase of a planned capacity enhancement and deployment that should see some 2000 peacekeepers on the ground by 2011, with sustainable funding coming from subcontracts and a variety of individual and institutional donors. It is noteworthy that NP has found that very qualified, committed and courageous people, men and women from all over the world, are available, willing to serve two-year terms, receiving an off-shore stipend of US$800/month plus a local subsistence allowance. The Investment Case for Scaling Up The case for investment in the creation of an unarmed, multinational civilian peace-force rests on four premises. First, in a world likely to see more, not less, violent conflict, large-scale non-violent conflict transformation is not an option, but an imperative. The cost of peacekeeping, peacemaking and peace-building pales into insignificance when it is compared with the cost and consequences of violent conflict and war. Second, unarmed ‘multinational’ civilian peacekeeping by non-governmental organizations is a largely unused but highly cost-effective and appropriate first response with which to contain violent conflict, to create space for peace-building, and to enable the conduct of further preventive diplomacy. By applying strategies of nonviolence, peacekeepers will help assume the ‘responsibility to protect’ children and women, refugees and internally displaced persons, human rights workers, humanitarian aid workers, journalists and others who are caught in the conflict cycle. Third, since nonviolent peacekeeping by non-governmental organizations has yet to capture the world’s imagination, bolder approaches to create demand are called for. By training peacekeepers on a larger scale than before, and by holding them in reserve, ready for immediate deployment, UN agencies and others charged with the responsibility for peacekeeping and security will be interested in procuring their services. Supply will enable UN agencies and others to call on and utilize unarmed peacekeepers which would not otherwise have been available. Fourth, provided that sufficient (matching) grant funding can initially be secured from appropriate donor sources to begin the process of capacity building of a pool of peacekeeping reservists, peacekeeping operations could become self-financing from income obtained under contract or in partnerships. The advantages of creating this multinational reserve peacekeeping force for UN agencies or donors include: &Mac183; Ready availability of stand-by surge capacity &Mac183; Lengthy bureaucratic procedures to identify, mobilize and deploy peacekeepers avoided &Mac183; Lower cost in comparison to UN Peacekeepers (only about 1/5th!) &Mac183; Flexibility of adding an entirely-civilian security dimension to ongoing emergency, development, human rights and democracy activities &Mac183; Greater informality and easier access to local communities &Mac183; Enhanced versatility and responsiveness in sudden adverse developments &Mac183; Unarmed peacekeepers will be well trained in conflict transformation skills and peacekeeping and peace-building techniques, and often be better able to help build the peace as well as prevent outbreaks of violence and war. Within the ‘big global picture’ context, the contribution of unarmed civilian peacekeeping may look insignificant, perhaps even naïve. But note: peacekeeping as an immediate, first response to dangerous polarization and escalation, to prevent death and destruction, is so much less costly both in money and in human lives than allowing conflict to spiral out of control. It is a strategy of opening up spaces in which conflict can be transformed and creative peace-building processes initiated. In fact, it is a highly sophisticated, albeit for many a counter-instinctual, strategic response to violent conflicts. Actually, the use of large-scale nonviolent peacekeeping force in the new global constellation has not yet received the serious consideration, and practical test, it deserves. Most if not all global reform proposals deal with various modalities of military peacekeeping and policing, but largely ignore the potential of unarmed civilian peacekeeping. A large unarmed Nonviolent Peaceforce would be a tangible sign of the new resolve of global civil society. It would be a concrete opportunity to enter into creative partnerships, ready and able to join new coalitions with other peace actors. And it would be an affirmation of humanitarian concerns and values. A Peace Role for Global Civil Society The remarkable omission of unarmed civilian peacekeeping as a significant idea and strategy in the plethora of new global proposals for peace and the role of civil society over the past decade clearly indicates the need for more effective advocacy and assertive lobbying. Nonetheless, some self-organization is now underway. The 2005 Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) is a case in point. So are the Nonviolent Peaceforce and other networks of civil peace organizations. In its current efforts to reform its peace and security mechanisms, the UN and individual governments now have an opportunity to allocate more attention and resources to the potential role global civil society may appropriately play. In fact, the use of unarmed civilian peacekeepers organized by civil society organizations (not by member states contributing police and civilian personnel to the UN) is entirely compatible with the new move toward preventive diplomacy and deployment of UN forces. Their added value lies in their low key, low cost, neutral, benign presence at local level, independent but aligned and complementary to other peace making work. They can be inserted into conflict situations early on, and with merely informal consent, thus making a graduated response possible. As such, they are more mission-driven than donor-driven. If Not Now—When? One may ask: ‘Why has organized civilian unarmed peacekeeping in conflict areas of third countries never gone beyond very small scale?’ The answer is that most civil society initiatives never really seriously tried to become a global force. Most lacked access to regional or sources of significant influence or global governance. Moreover, they could not mobilize significant resources, especially financial. And finally, the world simply did not seem ready to try and scale up nonviolent peacekeeping interventions. That has now changed. But the big challenge remains: how to go to scale? Perhaps the many recent problems of military peacekeeping will now make the case of nonviolent peacekeeping more persuasive, and more attractive for donor funding. The Nonviolent Peaceforce presents not only a new idea with a compelling moral appeal, but also a practical proposition of effective, benign and courageous activism based on the idea of ‘do no harm’—and the radical philosophy of making peaceful change possible. It is what you can say ‘yes’ to when you say ‘no’ to war. As such, this philosophy of nonviolence is every bit in the best interest of all peoples, states and the international community. NOTE 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) |
| TOP |