Estonia and Unifil: the Benefits to a Small State of Un Peacekeeping
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal on Baltic Security , 2017; 3(2): 17–27 Research Article Open Access Tony Lawrence1* Estonia And UNIFIL: The Benefits to a Small State of UN Peacekeeping DOI 10.1515/jobs-2017-0007 received October 2, 2017; accepted October 17, 2017. Abstract:1This article considers Estonia’s contribution, since May 2015, of an infantry company to the Finnish contingent of the Finnish/Irish battalion of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. It is intended to provide a case study of a small European state’s involvement in UN peacekeeping in the ‘post- Afghanistan’ security environment. Drawing on interviews with Estonian officials and peacekeepers, it sets out the rationale for Estonia’s contribution and explores the degree to which participation has met the expectations of the Estonian defence leadership. It concludes that participation in UNIFIL has largely been a valuable policy, both politically and for the defence forces. Keywords: Estonia, peacekeeping, small states, United Nations, UNIFIL. 1 Introduction The Estonian Defence Forces (EDF) currently participate in eight international operations (Estonian Defence Forces 2016). Two of these are NATO-led (Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan, Kosovo Force (KFOR) in Kosovo), one US-led (Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq), two fall under the auspices of the European Union (European Union Naval Force Mediterranean (EUNAVFOR Med) in the Mediterranean Sea, EUTM in Mali), and three are UN missions (MINUSMA in Mali, UNTSO in the Middle East, and UNIFIL in south Lebanon).2 Estonia’s parliament, whose approval is required for the use of EDF personnel abroad, has authorised the participation of a total of 101 personnel in these missions in 2017 (Riigikogu (Parliament of Estonia), National Defence Committee 2016). The largest single contribution is to UNIFIL, where Estonia has supplied a platoon to the Finnish contingent of the Finnish/Irish Battalion since May 2015. Among European nations, Estonia is the third largest contributor per capita of troops to UN operations.3 This article explores Estonia’s participation in UNIFIL as a case study of a small state’s involvement in UN peacekeeping in the ‘post-Afghanistan’ security environment. It sets out the rationale for Estonia’s contribution and explores the degree to which participation has met the expectations of the senior leadership in Tallinn. Empirical research for this article took the form of non-attributable interviews with eight former and serving officials in the Parliament of Estonia, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of 1 The author is grateful to Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, who kindly funded an International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS) report on the Irish, Finnish and Estonian experience of UN peacekeeping through the lens of UNIFIL (Lawrence, Jermalavičius and Bulakh 2016), the research for which also forms the basis of this article. The views and opinions expressed here are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the ICDS or the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. 2 EUTM: EU Training Mission; MINUSMA: United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali; UNTSO: United Nations Truce Supervision Organization; UNIFIL: United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon 3 Based on average monthly troop contributions to UN operations, January to April 2017. Data: International Peace Institute 2 0 1 7. *Corresponding author: Tony Lawrence, International Centre for Defence and Security, Tallinn E-mail: [email protected] © 2017 Tony Lawrence, published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. 18 Tony Lawrence Defence and defence forces, in addition to seven Estonian peacekeepers in south Lebanon. In order to preserve anonymity, their remarks are not individually referenced in this article. 2 Background: UNIFIL, the Finnish/Irish Battalion, and Estonia Israeli forces entered south Lebanon in March 1978, following a terrorist attack on a bus in Tel Aviv, to neutralise the threat to Israel from Palestinian militant groups operating from the border areas. The UN Security Council established the UNIFIL mission in the same month, mandating it to confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces, restore international peace and security, and assist the Government of Lebanon in re- establishing its authority over the area (United Nations Security Council 1978). UNIFIL has remained in south Lebanon ever since. Its mandate was enhanced in 2006, following the UN-brokered ceasefire that brought to an end the Second Lebanon War, to include tasks such as monitoring the cessation of hostilities, accompanying and supporting the Lebanese armed forces, and ensuring humanitarian access to civilian populations and the return of displaced persons (United Nations Security Council 2006). The size of the mission was also increased in line with the new mandate; as of June 2017, its total strength was 11,317, of whom 10,503 were uniformed personnel (United Nations Peacekeeping 2017a). Ireland, a country with a long history of prominent participation in UN peacekeeping, contributed a battalion to UNIFIL from its inception until 2001, when the mission was scaled down by the UN. Finland, also a frequent and active participant in UN peacekeeping, contributed a battalion from 1982 to 2001. The first joint Finnish/Irish battalion was formed for a 12-month period in 2006-7 to support the instigation of the enhanced UNIFIL mission, and the second (and current) joint battalion was created in 2013 when Finnish troops returned to south Lebanon to join the Irish, who had returned in 2011 (Defence Forces Ireland 2017; Finnish Defence Forces 2017). The joint battalion is regarded by both countries as a means of contributing in significant numbers to UN operations and of securing battalion-level experience and training without placing too great a strain on national resources (Lawrence, Jermalavičius and Bulakh 2016: pp.11-12). Command is alternated between the two countries, with the commanding nation – at the time of writing, Ireland – providing common services such as camp supplies and battalion-level communications, and the majority of the troops. As of June 2017, Ireland contributed 364 uniformed personnel to UNIFIL and Finland, 303 (United Nations Peacekeeping 2017b). Although it is presently the junior partner in the battalion, Finland’s overall contribution is higher than it would normally be as the figure also includes around 160 troops committed for a 12-month period to the UNIFIL joint reserve battalion (Yle Uutiset 2017). Finland agreed to replace France in this role following France’s invocation of Article 42.7 of the Treaty of Lisbon after the Paris terrorist attacks of November 2015. Estonia’s first contribution to UNIFIL was from December 1996 to June 1997, when it deployed a company under a Norwegian battalion as part of the development programme for the Baltic peacekeeping battalion, BALTBAT (Asson 2015: p.171). Since May 2015 it has contributed a platoon (38 personnel as of June 2017 (United Nations Peacekeeping 2017b)) integrated into the Finnish company of the Finnish/Irish Battalion. 3 Two decades of high-tempo operations Figure 1 illustrates that in the period following the reestablishment of its independence, Estonia has been an inconsistent troop contributor to UN peacekeeping missions. Apart from its provision of platoons to a Danish UNPROFOR battalion in Croatia for a six month period in 1995 and the previously mentioned company to UNIFIL from 1996 until 1997, both deployments conducted in the framework of the development of BALTBAT, its military contribution prior to the 2015 UNIFIL deployment was limited to one or two observers in UNTSO and specialist staff in MINUSMA (International Peace Institute 2017).4 For much of the 4 UNPROFOR: United Nations Protection Force in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina; UNTSO: United Nations Truce Super- vision Organization (Middle East); MINUSMA: United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali. operations, deploying in relatively large numbers to theatres such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq and Afghanistan (Paljak 2013: pp.234-7).Estonia Additionally, And Unifil: Thethroughout Benefits to thea Small same State period of un Peacekeeping it has held forces 19 on standby for the NATO Response Force and EU Battlegroups. The operations during this period – in Figure 1: Estonian TroopFigure Contributions 1. Estonian to UN Troop Missions, Contributions 1995 - Present. to UN Missions, 1995 - Present past two decades, Estonia has focused its military participation on NATO and US-led coalition operations particular in Iraq and Afghanistan – have been combat intensive, requiring a more traditional set of and, to a lesser extent, on EU operations, deploying in relatively large numbers to theatres such as Bosnia military skills than those dominant in peacekeeping operations. and Herzegovina, Iraq and Afghanistan (Paljak 2013: pp.234-7). Additionally, throughout the same period Thisit has oper heldating forces pattern on standby was common for the NATO among Response European Force countries and EU Battlegroups.during this period, The operations when even during those this wiperiodth strong – in affinitiesparticular forin Iraqthe andUN Afghanistansuch as Denmark, – have beenFinland, combat Norway intensive, and requiringSweden, aincreased more traditional their involvementset of military with skillsin NATO than thoseand the dominant EU at the