POLITICS: Big Five Under Fire for Avoiding UN Peace Missions

By Thalif Deen Reprint | | Print |

Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 7 2000 (IPS) - The five permanent members of the Security Council – the only states with veto powers over war and peace – are under increasing pressure to release some of their “well-trained, well- equipped” troops for UN peacekeeping operations.

Bangladesh has proposed that each of the five veto-wielding members – namely the United States, United Kingdom, France, China and Russia – be obligated to provide about five percent of the total number of troops needed for each peacekeeping operation they help create.

“This will be in keeping with their responsibilities as permanent members,” says Ambassador Anwarul Karim Chowdhury of Bangladesh, a country which is the fourth largest troop contributor to UN missions.

All five permanent members (P-5) have taken an identical stand on the issue: Funds and equipment, Yes. Troops, No.

The Bangladesh proposal, initiated at a closed-door meeting of the Security Council last week, comes at a time when UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is complaining that he is finding it increasingly difficult to raise troops for peacekeeping missions – particularly so for the troubled UN Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL).

The five permanent members – along with most Western nations – are keeping away from most peacekeeping missions primarily because they don’t want their soldiers to return home in body bags.

“Spilling Third World blood is okay. But spilling P-5 blood is obviously a No-No,” says a Third World diplomat.

Annan says that member states in the Security Council with “significant military capacity” – and who vote for UN peacekeeping missions – should be prepared to back up their votes with troops.

“They can’t leave us in the lurch if this is to be a viable mission. We need strong, viable military units and someone has got to contribute,” he says.

Over the last several months, Annan has made several appeals to member states – particularly those with “well-trained, well-equipped” troops – to provide military contingents to one of the most troubled peacekeeping missions in Sierra Leone. But the reaction has been negative.

Last week, Annan warned that proposed troop withdrawals by India (about 3,000 troops) and Jordan (about 1,830 troops) could have a negative affect on the UN’s peacekeeping efforts in Sierra Leone.

If UNAMSIL does not receive the peacekeepers it needs now, he said, it will be impossible to further strengthen the Mission into the year 2001, as had been previously envisaged.

“The credibility of the international community’s military presence in Sierra Leone, which is a key element of its peace efforts in that country, could be undermined,” he warned.

“I therefore appeal to member states, in particular those with large and well-equipped armed forces, to urgently consider participating in UNAMSIL with troops and/or equipment,” he added.

The Jordanians had earlier threatened to withdraw their soldiers unless Western nations – particularly members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation – agreed to beef up UNAMSIL with additional troops.

Annan told reporters that Jordan’s decision raised “a very serious question”: “Can the Security Council adopt resolutions that require us to deploy troops, and those in the Council do nothing, particularly those major league countries with large forces?”

After India and Jordan decided to withdraw their troops, the only countries offering additional troops were Bangladesh, Kenya and Ghana.

All three countries have offered about 3,000 troops to replace some of the departing contingents. But Annan says that this will not resolve the problem because the United Nations is also committed to increasing the present UNAMSIL strength from 12,400 to 20,500 troops.

As of the end of September, only 88 of the 189 UN member states were contributing troops to UN peacekeeping operations. The 10 largest troop contributors were primarily from the Third World: India (4,507), Nigeria (3,439), Jordan (3,400), Bangladesh (2,362), Ghana (1,906), Australia (1,710), Pakistan (1,209), Kenya (1,197), Poland (1,077) and Nepal (1,037).

The only Western nation in the top 10 is Australia – largely because of its political commitment to a peacekeeping force in its neighbourhood: the UN Mission in East Timor.

The United States, which currently provides about 900 troops, mostly from non-UN missions, continues to scrupulously avoid peacekeeping operations, particularly after it lost about 18 Army Rangers in Somalia in the early 1990s.

Although Britain has sent paratroopers to Sierra Leone to rescue its nationals caught in the crossfire, it has refused to field any British soldiers in the UN peacekeeping mission in Sierra Leone.

Currently, Britain has a total of 560 troops in UN peacekeeping operations worldwide compared with 490 by France, 302 by Russia and 95 by China.

As a general rule, Western nations avoid any key role in UN or regional peacekeeping unless it has a bearing on national or security interests.

Frustrated by his failure to find troops, Annan says that peacekeeping missions are more like volunteer fire departments. “But that description is too generous,” he adds. “Every time, there is a fire, we must first find fire engines and the funds to run them before we can start dousing the flames.”