The International Criminal Court's (ICC) chief prosecutor,
Luis Moreno-Ocampo, has
named names of Darfur war crimes and crimes against humanity suspects and according to current
reports, is applying for an official start to proceedings. Senior figures allegedly responsible for several "atrocities" in the Western region of Darfur such as Ahmed Muhammed Harun former interior minister and janjaweed militia leader Ali Mohammed Ali Abd-al-Rahman were two of the names mentioned by Moreno-Ocampo in a press conference in the Hague. Moreno-Ocampo requested support for his endeavor to hold people responsible for the crimes committed in the African country.
Though the ICC has battled with criticisms ranging from "lack of due process," "infringement of sovereignty," and "weak checks and balances," one (i.e. me) cannot discount the few monumental successes. Arrest warrants have been issued to war criminals in Uganda and the Congo in previous years, proving that there is a lot the ICC can do. Yet, there's lots of room for improvement.
This Reformer is choosing "hopeful" as her stance regarding the Darfur proceedings. It may not have that hint of Rwandan
gacaca or the Nicole Kidman as
Silvia Broome touch of "to-forgive-somone-you-must-first-drown-him-then-actually-save-him" ala
The Interpreter, but there's nothing like hearing the sound of the gavel and seeing a suspect's face shift from utterly hopeful to "%*&#!!!!!!!!!" in a heartbeat.
And although Uncle Sam claims that the ICC is not his cup of tea, perchance we Americans can settle with letting a smile unconsciously creep onto our lips when the day comes that CNN's 2" byline space (reserved predominantly for those who fall of cruise ships), moving approximately 10mph, spells "THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS - DARFUR WAR CRIMINALS CONVICTED IN ICC COURT RULING FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY" on the bottom of our television sets.
By: Ms. X | Tuesday, February 27, 2007 at 10:07 PM | | 
I came across this
provocative article the other week, which questions WHO benefits from the U.S. H1-B VISA program.
I find their statistics very interesting -- I did not know, for example, that Indian nationals were the highest applicants for H1-B VISAs. And another surprising little note: these workers usually bring their gained "technology" home to India, therefore benefiting India, and not necessarily the U.S.! The stereotypical realist would disregard this ideal cross-country intellectual exchange and argue that those workers would most likely enjoy the fruit America has to offer, marry the first citizen they lay eyes on to change their H1-B status, and remain in America, unconsciously adding to the immigration problem. Plus, much could be said about the loss of American jobs, and it would be a bigger deal because I am assuming that the workers from India possess high-level skills, and only want to add to that. But my comment on the job loss is: let's compete! A little competition never hurt the American spirit, right?
I don't perceive a threat here, just a healthy exchange of ideas (ahh, globalization)... Let's not be too quick to assume that with this exchange we are "losing" and create an opportunity for a threat.
By: Ms. X | Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:51 PM | |
According to a December 2006 troop contributions report from the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations (“Ranking of Military and Police Contributions to UN Operations”), the top three troop-contributing nations (TCNs) in the international system are developing states in Asia. Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan contributed over 9,000 troops each to UN missions in December 2006 (“Ranking of Military and Police Contributions to UN Operations”). Recent participation of Asian nationals in UN peacekeeping operations has generated interest regarding their abilities as TCNs. With approximately sixteen peacekeeping operations currently ongoing around the world (“United Nations Peacekeeping”), it is no secret that these Asian countries are becoming major instruments for the UNDPKO and, on a larger scale, the UN and the rest of the international community. Although relatively new players in the realm of international peacekeeping, UN peacekeepers from Asia have taken on a more significant role than the peacekeepers from previous middle power TCNs.
The end of the Cold War led to several structural changes in the developing world, often leaving the marks of violence and civil conflict, which were traced back to decolonization. Instability reigned in several states in the international system, and in order to meet the challenge, the United Nations established the Department of Peacekeeping Operations in 1992 (Krishnasamy, 67). The demand for a new framework for peacekeeping called for a more comprehensive approach to addressing civil conflicts, instead of the “traditional” approach associated with peacekeeping at the time. This approach was needed to meet the disastrous effects of civil conflict, which often left states with nothing to rebuild their governments and economies. Peacekeepers were given more responsibilities to meet these growing needs, symbolizing a significant shift away from traditional peacekeeping.
Traditional peacekeeping usually involved unarmed or lightly armed troops and deployment would take place once a ceasefire agreement was installed. Today, multidimensional peacekeeping calls for earlier engagement in conflict. Multidimensional peacekeeping often takes place before a ceasefire is established, making peacekeeping operations the jumpstart to the peace-building process (“United Nations Peacekeeping: Meeting New Challenges”). The prime example of post-Cold War UN peacekeeping is the framework that shaped the UN Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC). The peacekeeping mission in Cambodia from 1991-1993 was the first of its kind, and it included “elements of peacekeeping, peacemaking, economic and social maintenance and nation-building” (Acharya, 121). The new “model” that emerged clearly depicted a new role for the UN to consider in international peacekeeping.
With the new post-Cold War framework, peacemaking began to play an integral role in the UNDPKO, and this particular feat called for several changes within the department. Operations prior to the formal establishment of the UNDPKO concentrated more on traditional peacekeeping, leaving the “inextricable link” to peacemaking neglected (Ratner, 216). A critical point that the UNDPKO managed to address in its early years was improving intelligence for better conflict prevention (Ratner, 223-224). Multidimensional peacekeeping also forced the UN to expand its view of potential participants in the UNDPKO. Since the forces of globalization managed to expand the effects of national problems, the UN had to look beyond the members of the Security Council to set the agenda on peace and security. The UNDPKO called for participation from more member-states, most notably the members of the developing world. The states from the developing world, although not new to taking part in UN peacekeeping missions, soon took on a larger role at the UNDPKO (Ratner, 228).
Since the inception of the UNDPKO, most peacekeeping troops were from middle power or Scandinavian states. Canada was arguably the most prominent TCN, and until this day, peacekeeping is often heralded as Canada’s major contribution to the international system (Jockel, 1). Scandinavian states such as Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, were also known for being very supportive of UN peacekeeping operations, and their support was manifested by vast amounts of troop contributions. However, the growing complexity surrounding multidimensional peacekeeping operations created several disincentives for these states to allocate troops solely for the UN. Illustrated below is a table containing the most recent figures (December 2006) for TCN rankings:
Table 1. Military and Police Contributions from Select UN Member-States
| Ranking | Country | Number of Members |
| 1 | Pakistan | 9,867 |
| 2 | Bangladesh | 9,681 |
| 3 | India | 9,483 |
| 4 | Jordan | 3,820 |
| 5 | Ghana | 2,694 |
| 43 | United States | 324 |
| 50 | Finland | 239 |
| 53 | Norway | 212 |
| 55 | Sweden | 164 |
| 57 | Denmark | 163 |
| 61 | Canada | 132 |
Source: Ranking of Military and Police Contributions to UN Operations (Monthly Report). UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations. 31 December 2006.
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/contributors/2006/dec06_2.pdf.
Given these figures, it is obvious that neither Canada nor the Scandinavian states are the major TCNs in the international system. Asian nations, particularly Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan have become the most prominent players. Statistics from December 2000 also show India and Pakistan contributing approximately 3,000 troops each, in comparison to the 1,014 from all the Scandinavian states (Krishnasamy, 58). However, reliance on these figures alone present several problems. Although the UN data that is available to the public is reliable, misinterpretation often occurs. Since the shift from traditional peacekeeping, UN peacekeepers dhave encompassed a wide range of personnel. A peacekeeper could be defined as a military trooper, military observer, civilian personnel, policeman, or volunteer (“United Nations Peacekeeping: Meeting New Challenges”). Determining the actual number of military troops, therefore, requires further statistical research. Although there is a wide range of classifications, the available data still points to the Asian nations as being the largest contributors of personnel of all kinds to the UNDPKO.
With the rise of Asian peacekeepers in the international system, several opportunities have been created to question their overall contribution to UN peacekeeping. Salman Ahmed, Senior Political Advisor in the Office of the Under Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, noted that Asian peacekeepers in active UN peacekeeping operations are known for their skills as good soldiers. He also stated that nationals from states in the developing world are often “used to” the harsh realties of wartime, making them more acceptant of casualties (Ahmed, Salman). However, he noted that peacekeepers from these countries are often not properly trained to handle sophisticated military equipment. Although the troops could be trained prior to deployment, time is taken up during pre-deployment preparations (Krishnasamy, 58). Ahmed also noted that often, nationals from the developing world are more able to sympathize with the plight of the citizens of the countries they working in. Because several of these new peacekeepers understand the devastating effects that often result from colonialism, they are more able to relate with those they are protecting. By this theory, local people are less intimidated by the peacekeepers that are assigned to protect them. Local people would therefore, be less likely to show signs of animosity towards their peacekeepers. Unlike the perceived negative associations that local people in missions have towards Westerners, developing world peacekeepers are not as stigmatized (Ross). The overall efficiency of these Asian peacekeepers has led to their recent domination in the UNDPKO (Ahmed, Salman).
Ahmed noted that the rise of Asian peacekeepers could be due to a speculation that developing countries could avoid supplying troops to the War in Iraq once they commit troops to the UNDPKO. Coincidentally, the top three troop contributors to the UNDPKO are not part of the 22 non-U.S. military forces stationed in Iraq (“Iraq Coalition Troops”). Another common explanation for the strong desire to contribute to the UNDPKO is the perceived enhancement of a country’s international image. Contributions to UN peace operations are often motivated by desires to be “attractive to the international community,” which could result in stronger bilateral or multilateral ties. India is known for seeking to strengthen its status in the international system in order to move towards being considered a ‘great’ power. Speculations have also been made about India’s candidacy for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, and its relation to strong support for the UNDPKO. Pakistan, on the other hand, may be just as active as India as a TCN to balance the threat it perceives from its neighbor (Krishnasamy, 58).
Although the contributions of Asian UN peacekeepers to the security of the international system are vast, there is minimal recognition for the work that they do. The stigma attached to many of the leading TCNs is that they are from the developing world, which creates a general divide at the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly (the Fourth Committee is essentially responsible for matters relating to the UNDPKO). It was noted during a 2000 session of the Fourth Committee that many countries “are still under-represented in the DPKO,” which called for concern from the higher offices of the UN. A delegate from the Philippines noted that, "troop contributors from developing countries should not be left out, as they feel they had been, during policy discussions and early planning phases of peacekeeping missions. Troop contributors from developing countries should be allowed to join the nexus that presently binds the Secretariat and rich troop contributing countries on peacekeeping" (Krishnasamy, 63).
Several developing countries advocating this argument were from one of the largest blocs in the General Assembly, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).While it is argued that TCNs from NAM sought some form of “recognition” from the Fourth Committee for their peacekeeping efforts around the world, their reaction was interpreted differently. The UN Secretariat, in particular, saw the push for more involvement in the consultation side of the UNDPKO mandates as a way to obtain more power, therefore forcing co-sovereignty (Krishnasamy, 63). Most members of NAM further attested that those who take on “a more direct role in peacekeeping operations” often lack proper recognition, as compared to those who have “an indirect role but who contribute financial and logistical support” (Krishnasamy, 64).
Peacekeepers from Asia are currently working in missions all over the world. Since their status at the UNDPKO is often not officially recognized, it is quite rare to see their efforts make headlines. In 2000, during the outbreak of violent conflict in Sierra Leone, the UN looked to peacekeepers from South Asia to ease tensions. The U.S., playing an indirect role, chose to transport Bangladeshi peacekeepers to Sierra Leone to join the contingent of African Union (AU) forces. South Asia’s role in peacekeeping in Sierra Leone, however, began long before the Bangladeshi deployment in 2000 (Ahmed, Kamal). Ten thousand predominantly Asian peacekeepers were also set to take part in a mission to Sudan. Because of the inability of the AU troops stationed in the region to keep the conflict under control, the UNDPKO decided in 2006 to deploy a force to assist the AU troops (Fisher). However, the force was later rejected as the Sudanese President, Omar al-Bashir, resisted the UNDPKO mandate (Heinlein). Finally, on January 31st, a reported force of “more than a hundred” female peacekeepers from India was deployed to Liberia (Ross). The mission in Liberia is intended to aid in the rebuilding of the country’s weak security force. It was noted that the experience most of the women had serving in “turbulent areas” of Northern India served as ample preparation for the mission in Liberia (Ross).
The collective efforts of several states in Asia to take on the challenges of the UNDPKO in recent years are notable. Since the transition from traditional to multidimensional peacekeeping, the inclusion of several nationals from Asian developing states managed to overtake the roles of Canada and the Scandinavian states at the UNDPKO. While Canada and the Scandinavian states were not necessarily considered ineffective TCNs, the need for the UNDPKO to extend participation to members of the developing world soon created the opportunity for their dominance. Asian peacekeepers from developing states brought with them to the UNDPKO several essential qualities that allowed for them to be considered effective. Because of the qualities they possessed, mostly from experience on the field and at home, Asians at the UNDPKO managed to rise and become the top TCNs in the international system. Although their contributions to peacekeeping in the international system are still severely under-recognized, their impact on peace itself cannot be discounted. They have taken on direct roles in violent conflicts and have secured for themselves a notable position in the realm of international peacekeeping.
Bibliography
Acharya, Amitav. “Asian Norms and Practices in UN Peace Operations.” UN Peace Operations and Asian Security. Acharya, Amitav and Mely Caballero-Anthony, eds. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Ahmed, Kamal. “South Asia’s UN Peace Role.” BBC News. 9 May 2000.
Ahmed, Salman. Lecture. “The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations.” Seton Hall University and the United Nations Association of the United States of America. United Nations Headquarters, New York, NY. 20 July 2006.
Fisher, Jonah. “Darfur’s doomed peacekeeping mission.” BBC News. 9 March 2006.
Heinlein, Peter. “Sudan Rejects UN Peacekeepers.” Voice of America News. 20 September 2006.
Jockel, Joseph T. Canada and International Peacekeeping. Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1994.
Krishnasamy, Kabilan. “‘Recognition’ for Third World Peacekeepers: India and Pakistan,” International Peacekeeping, 8:4, pg. 56-76 (2001).
Ratner, Steven R. The New UN Peacekeeping. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995.
Ross, Will. “Liberia gets all-female peacekeeping force.” BBC News. 31 January 2007.
“Iraq Coalition Troops.” GlobalSecurity.org. November 2006.
“Ranking of Miliary and Police Contributions to UN Operations (Monthly Report).” UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations. 31 December 2006.
“United Nations Peacekeeping.” UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations.
“
United Nations Peacekeeping: Meeting New Challenges.”
United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations.
New York: United Nations Department of Public Information. June 2006.
By: Ms. X | at 12:24 AM | |
Not that I have absolutely no sympathy for those in Africa affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic characteristic of their continent (it really is a terrible disease, and I wouldn't mind having it erased from the earth), but who are we trying to fool?
Product (RED) taps into the beast that is American consumerism. Unlike our previously colorless lives, we can now take advantage of red-colored
cellular phones,
iPod nanos,
shoes,
watches,
credit cards, and get this --
t-shirts. Before you think America has turned happy-go-Communist, check out the
official press release. Not that I discourage those consumers who favor buying products which eventually impact the lives of those in other continents, but should we really sensationalize HIV/AIDS even more?
People living on (cue everyone's favorite statistic) less than around $2 a day are more likely to die of
diarrhea -- a CURABLE disease -- than AIDS. But why isn't Bono jumping on the anti-diarrhea bandwagon? Maybe it's too difficult to come up with a
diarrhea ribbon, or celebrities are afraid of attaching themselves to a highly unattractive disease. Maybe nobody wants to make
a quilt for diarrhea. Maybe more people think that
Magic Johnson with AIDS > Magic Johnson with diarrhea. Who knows.
Regardless, since the campaign is in full-swing, I wish those handling the $$$ take time to reflect on efficient distribution. It's about addressing what is most important at the time. Everybody's concerned about getting tested for HIV, sex education, and treatment, but those poor people still go home to crappy shacks with bad water. It's likely that more people worry about where to get water for themselves and their kids than skipping a dose of AZT.
So, if you're already guiltily holding your
limited edition (RED) iPod nano for your Valentine, don't feel too bad. I'm sure a village in Africa will be getting some form of support. Hopefully, the support addresses the
prudent hierarchy of problems.
By: Ms. X | Wednesday, February 7, 2007 at 6:58 PM | |
