The Reform of the Peacekeeping Mission in Transnistria: a Premise for Conflict Settlement
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE REFORM OF THE PEACEKEEPING MISSION IN TRANSNISTRIA: a premise for conflict settlement Кyiv 2014 The project was implemented by the Institute of World Policy with the support of the Black Sea Trust for Regional Cooperation. Opinions expresses in this publication do not necessarily represent those of the Black Sea Trust of the German Marshall Fund. AUTHORS: Cornel Ciurea Alyona Getmanchuk Leonid Litra Eduard Tugui The authors express their gratitude to the experts who have reviewed this study, especially to Professor Andrey Devyatkov and other experts who preferred to remain anonymous. © Institute of World Policy, 2014 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 INTRODUCTION 6 Charter I. International management of local conflicts: evolution and models of peacekeeping operetions 7 Collective security and crisis management: the UN and evolution of peacekeeping missions ……………………………………………… 7 UN peacekeeping principles and mandates ……………………………………………………… 9 Regional arrangements: two models of peacekeeping ……………………………………… 11 Peacekeeping missions of the European Union ………………………………………………… 11 From“peace enforcement” to “state building”: the Russian military presence in post-Soviet space …………………………………………… 14 CHAPTER II. Transnistrain settlement process and peacekeeping format 18 Dynamics and different views on the Transnistrian conflict settlement and the Security Zone …………………………………………………………………… 18 Formula and peculiarities of the peacekeeping operation in the Security Zone ………………………………………………………………………… 21 Why the current peacekeeping mission is unsustainable? ………………………………… 24 CHAPTER III. How to build an efficient peacekeeping mission in transnistria? 26 Several scenarios of the development of the situation in the Security Zone ……… 26 Recommendations 28 3 THE REFORM OF THE PEACEKEEPING MISSION IN TRANSNISTRIA: a premise for conflict settlement Executive summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Peacekeeping missions evolved in the XX century from simple missions covering purely security issues to complex peacekeeping missions that go far beyond the classical format. The experience gained in deploying peacekeeping missions and random failures of some operations provided incentives for shaping more professional and multi-task missions. The EU and other international actors have developed peacekeeping missions that focus on crisis management, strengthening of the rule of law, civilian administration and civil protection, while the Russian peacekeeping mission model is peculiar with its hard security, and Russia uses it as a mechanism for legitimizing its military presence in the post-Soviet space. The peacekeeping mission in Transnistria had a positive role when it was established. However, along with the changes in the region and in the conflict settlement process, the current mission no longer corresponds with the current needs. Already 22 years passed and the mission did not develop from a provisional mechanism designed to stop hostilities to a mission designed to create confidence in the process of conflict settlement and rapprochement between the two banks. Therefore, the current peacekeeping has to be transformed into an international civil monitoring mission, which would have a clear mandate, concrete tasks, impartial and would be in line with the UN standards. Transforming the current mission into an efficient international peacekeeping mission is not an easy task due to the changes in the area and a shaky status quo, as well as the unwillingness of Russia to accept it. That is why the situation will change, and several scenarios are possible. The most positive is the one in which parties agree to reform the mission. A process of reform would entail a rethinking of the decision-making process within the Joint Control Commission and a mechanism of rotation of senior officials as well as a mission that would be more focused on law enforcement and ensuring that human rights, including the free movement, are respected. 5 THE REFORM OF THE PEACEKEEPING MISSION IN TRANSNISTRIA: a premise for conflict settlement INTRODUCTION The cyclicity is not inherent only to the democratization waves described by Samuel Huntington or civilization waves interpreted in a materialistic way by Alvin Toffler. The „wavelike” dynamics is a regularity for international security as well, the security is dependent on governance regimes and global production, a proof of this is that the crises and their management in international practice have evolved steadily since major changes triggered by the 19th century. International reality dictated periodic arrangements between states in terms of security, marking the international community response to the crises that accompanied global changes. Although the changes in the settlement process of the Transnistrian conflict are still pending and the regional security, especially in light of events in Ukraine, makes any progress unlikely, it is however important to hold discussions about local mechanisms of ensuring security. For quite a long time the debates on the Transnsitrian conflict settlement were not concerning the peacekeeping operation in the Security Zone. Such a debate started in 2012 when a citizen of Moldova was deadly shot in the Security Zone. Given that the debate at the diplomatic level was rather political without jumping into details, the aim of the authors in this research is to structure and calibrate the debate on possible solutions to reform the peacekeeping format and to depoliticize the discussions, shifting them to a politico-technical dimension rather than a purely political one. The authors do not pretend to that this paper can trigger the reform of the peacekeeping mission “today” given that there are no proper conditions to raise this issue. However, it is important to underline the systemic failures of the peacekeeping mission and its management mechanism and to actively shape a vision of how the future peacekeeping mission should be built in order to facilitate a peaceful settlement of the conflict and decrease the tensions between the parties and in the Security Zone. Therefore, when a positive international and local context will appear, one should be prepared to offer a professional vision. 6 CHAPTER I. International management of local conflicts: evolution and models of peacekeeping operetions CHAPTER I. The Charter of the United Nations does not define the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT OF LOCAL peacekeeping operations but is the legal framework for the conflIcTs: evoluTIon and models of representative missions by the goal stipulated in Chapter 1 of the PEACEKEEPING OPERETIONS organization — to maintain international peace and security2.The Security Council, responsible for mandating any operation that would contribute to respecting this major goal and obliged by COLLECTIVE SECURITY AND CRISIS MANAGEMENT: the context to intervene in different regional conflicts, referred to THE UN AND EVOLUTION OF PEacEKEEPING MISSIONS Chapter VI of the UN Charter — Pacific Settlement of Disputes— when it authorized the first peacekeeping operations but never made If the Peace of Westphalia just legitimated a technical explicit reference to the articles of this Chapter. Peacekeeping mechanism of balance of power, since the Congress of Vienna missions evolved gradually, in terms of concept and operation, (1815) custom and international legal norms in relation to security in order to meet the constantly changing international politics and crisis management have gradually become articulated. Henry realities and for this reason developed the first two generations Kissinger, sometimes too generous in defining the role of the Concert of such missions: of Europe in ensuring security in the 19th century, reminds us that “the Concert of Europe implied that competitive nations to govern observer Interposition by consensus the issues affecting the overall stability”1. Collective UN Truce Supervision Organization UN Emergency Force commitments during the period when the European nationalism (UNTSO), (UNEF I), contrasted with imperialism were not sufficient for international 1948- 1956-1967; security; the proof is a setback of security and two world wars that UN Military Observer Group in India followed. But they meant, however, the legitimization of collective and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), security and the establishment of the first joint interventions for 1949 - ensuring peace. Great powers’ interventions in the mid-nineteenth century in the Balkan region, to ensure protection of the Christian The withdrawal of British administration from Hindustan and majority, or the mission in Crete, at the end of the 19th century, are the Middle East tensed the southern flank of Eurasia, when the in many ways similar to modern peace operations. In the interwar new states India and Pakistan got involved in a war in Kashmir, period, the framework provided by the League of Nations allowed while the declaration of independence of Israel was accompanied the deployment of several international missions relevant to by a lengthy war with neighbouring Arab states. Thus, the first two peacekeeping operations, such as the mission that administered in peacekeeping operations deployed by the UN were the UN Mili- 1920-1935 the Saarland state in Germany. tary Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) and the UN The creation of the United Nations (UN) and relevant Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO). Both of these missions, international commitments aimed at ensuring collective security which continue operating to this day, exemplified the observation of states,