IRIN Interview on South Africa’s role with UN peacekeeping mission

As a team of South African officials returns from UN headquarters in New York to report back in coming days on South Africa’s participation in a UN peacekeeping mission to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), one of the country’s leading experts on peacekeeping, Cedric de Coning, Assistant Director and Programme Manager: Peacekeeping at the Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD), spoke to IRIN about Pretoria’s readiness for the mission. QUESTION: What would the role be of South African combat troops in the DRC? ANSWER: The reference to combat troops is perhaps a bit misleading because the South African troops will be part of a UN Peacekeeping Force. As such their intent is to assist in the peace process, not to get involved in any fighting. They will be interpositioned between the belligerent parties, they will exercise control over a certain area through patrols, checkpoints and roadblocks. They will secure strategic places such as airports, the UN offices, hospitals, etc. They will create a secure environment for humanitarian relief and protect humanitarian aid by for instance, providing security for food convoys. Q: What happens if South African troops come under fire? A: If they become involved in a situation where the belligerent parties threaten them, each other or innocent civilians, they will have the mandate to use force to protect themselves and any innocent civilians, be they local or international aid workers. It is important to remember, however, that peacekeepers should first try all peaceful means of addressing such situations. They should only resort to force as an absolute last resort. This means that negotiating skills are a peacekeeper’s most important weapon in this kind of situation. Unfortunately, not enough time is spent in a soldier’s routine training on conflict management skills. ACCORD realised this after our involvement in training Exercise Blue Crane and we have subsequently designed a conflict management course for peacekeepers which we present at all the peacekeeping training courses at the SADC (Southern African Development Community) Regional Peacekeeping Training Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe. Q: Are South African troops ready for peacekeeping in the Congo? A: South Africa is better prepared for its first peacekeeping deployment than any country I can think of. South Africa has taken a very responsible route. Despite being under considerable international pressure to participate in various peacekeeping operations since 1994, the government decided first to take time out to ensure that our troops have been trained for peacekeeping. Many officers attended specialised peacekeeping courses all over the world. Two infantry battalions were trained locally and then tested during the SADC brigade level peacekeeping exercise held in April 1999 in South Africa - Exercise Blue Crane, the largest peacekeeping exercise ever held in Africa. At the same time the policy framework - in the form of the White Paper on South Africa’s Participation in International Peace Missions - was put in place. This is one of the most progressive peacekeeping policy documents in the world and provides, among others for a central role for conflict prevention and the role of civilians in peacekeeping. Q: Does this mean that South Africa’s “peace-making” efforts in the DRC have failed? A: Any conflict needs to be resolved at the political level. You can’t shoot your way to peace. The peacekeeping mission, and South Africa’s contribution to it, is something which is done in support of the larger peace process. In essence the peacekeeping force is there to provide the two belligerent parties with the assurance that there is a neutral third party present that can oversee and verify that both sides are keeping to the peace agreement. By contributing troops, South Africa strengthens its hand in the mediation process because it shows our commitment and that we are willing to put our money where our mouths are. Q: What about South African troops being killed or kidnapped like the Sierra Leone peacekeepers? The UN mission in the DRC is designed in such a way that approximately 500 unarmed military observers will be supported by approximately 5,000 infantry and other support troops. The South African contribution should thus not be seen in isolation to the larger mission design and other troops to be deployed in the Congo. Q: Will the DRC peacekeepers be better equipped? A: The infantry battalions are intended to be well equipped and supported and they should thus be in a much better situation to defend themselves should they find themselves in the those circumstances. I am sure that they will have studied the Sierra Leone experience very well and that they would deploy in such a way that they do not repeat the Sierra Leone experience. This implies, for example, moving around in a defendable group, and not deploying without the necessary communications and other essential equipment in place. Peacekeeping is not without risk, but one can prevent unnecessary loss of life by taking certain precautions. This is our first peacekeeping experience and I am sure the South African troops and their officers will err on the side of caution rather than arrogance. Q: After Somalia, Rwanda and now Sierra Leone - is UN peacekeeping still relevant? A: There is no doubt that the United Nations will have to seriously re-visit the way it plans, staffs and supports its peacekeeping missions. Many of today’s conflicts are incredibly complex and fluid. The UN went to Sierra Leone after a peace agreement was in place and consequently, the force had been designed, equipped and deployed as a peacekeeping force. The situation changed almost overnight when one of the parties attacked the UN force, killing four UN peacekeepers and taking 500 more hostage. Clearly the UN made mistakes in Sierra Leone and we need to seriously study those to avoid the same mistake being repeated elsewhere. Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary General is reported to have said that the UN should abandon outdated concepts of neutral peacekeeping and replace them with a more muscular form of peace enforcement if it is to avoid the kind of fiasco that has unfolded in Sierra Leone. Mr Annan has convened an international panel of experts to reassess UN peacekeeping and he plans to present their findings to the Millennium Assembly in September this year. The future of peacekeeping will be hotly debated over the next couple of months. We should not forget, however, that there are 15 UN peacekeeping missions today all over the world, and that the vast majority of these are making a meaningful contribution to peace in those countries where they are deployed. Sierra Leone has caused a lot of white noise over the last 30 days. That has distorted our understanding of what peacekeeping can and cannot do. The basic dilemma is that the UN cannot force belligerents to implement a peace agreement if they do not have the political will to do so themselves - peacekeeping has been developed as a monitoring tool, not a combat tool. Q: Should the DRC mandate therefore be more “robust”? Mr Annan suggests that we should look to stronger, more robust peacekeeping in the future, but even such ideas will certainly fall short of the UN going to war against UNITA in Angola or the Interhamwe in the DRC to force them to disarm against their will. This may be very unsatisfactory and frustrating at times, but if we accept the limitations of peacekeeping, we will be in a much better position to apply it successfully where it can work and refrain from using it as a remedy where it has no chance of succeeding.