How have global peace operations evolved in the past decade? What challenges do these trends create? This paper from the Danish Institute for International Studies maps recent United Nations led and delegated peace operations. It identifies two major trends in policy and practice: State-building interventions and hybrid operations. While these may be seen as pragmatic solutions to political problems, they also raise serious questions about accountability.
UN peacekeeping is at a record high, with more than 104,000 men and women currently serving. The number of regional and bilateral troops in UN-authorised (but not UN-led) peace operations is also rising. Considering the variety of peace operations in the past decade, it is difficult to identify trends. It helps to distinguish between functional and organisational aspects: What are peace operations supposed to do and what structures are set up to perform these functions? From this perspective, two trends stand out: State building interventions attempt to re-establish or reform central governance structures. Hybrid operations draw on both UN capacity and resources outside the UN system. Other features include:
- Protection of civilians: Whether or not explicitly mentioned in the mandate, the responsibility to protect civilians has become an expectation of peace operations. Authorisation to use force to protect civilians has become implicit.
- Multidimensionality: Peace operations have increasingly become mixed enterprises. They deploy both military and civilian capacities in order to provide not merely ‘negative peace’ (absence of violence) but also ‘positive peace’ (social justice).
- UN Revival: The UN has increasingly taken over operations initiated by regional arrangements. This confirms both the UN’s unparalleled international legitimacy and the exhaustion of resources of non-UN peacekeepers.
- Virtual trusteeship: Peace operations are increasingly called upon to assume government functions. They have become more intrusive and transformative as they aim not only to maintain security but to build foundations for peace.
- ‘No organisation left behind’: As demand for complex peace operations has increased, the number of implementing institutions has grown too.
- Peacekeeping Apartheid: Troops for UN-led peace operations are increasingly provided by Third World states such as Bangladesh, Nigeria and Pakistan. Troops for delegated operations are primarily provided by Western states.
Predictions could prove irrelevant, but current evidence suggests hybrid operations and state-building interventions will be around for some time. These trends may be seen as innovative flexibility, responding to the challenges of our time. But they also raise serious questions of accountability.
-
The move towards state-building raises a fundamental paradox of trying to build democracy through autocracy.
- The move towards hybrid operations aggravates this paradox by diffusing international responsibility. It is increasingly difficult to identify who is to be held accountable for international efforts.
- There is a need to think more thoroughly about this paradox and identify ways of easing it.
- Those designing future state-building hybrid peace operations need to establish oversight mechanisms. These must allow both the Security Council and citizens to hold state-builders accountable for their actions and omissions.
