Policing the New World Disorder Peace Operations and Public Security
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Policing the New World Disorder Peace Operations and Public Security Edited by Robert B. Oakley - Michael J. Dziedzic - Eliot M. Goldberg Foreword Peace operations have gained international attention in recent years, and many excellent studies have appeared on the role of the military in separating warring factions, enforcing cease-fires, and providing humanitarian relief. Another dimension of peacekeeping has become readily apparent, however: the need to strengthen or rebuild indigenous public security institutions. Without a functioning police force, judiciary, and penal system, any troubled state is further hindered in its attempts to overcome internal crisis. The Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University has addressed this growing concern and concluded that rebuilding viable law enforcement capabilities is more central to the success of peace operations than generally appreciated. INSS assembled a core group of experienced civilian and military experts to prepare a series of case studies for discussion. The case studies then formed the basis for a conference held in late 1997 and attended by over one hundred international specialists. This book is the end result of that effort. Policing the New World Disorder should prove useful in conducting comparative analyses of operations involving international assistance to public security institutions. Chapters contributed by the Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian, Australian, and Austrian experts take a broad view of the subject. A final chapter offers some specific recommendations for consideration by the United Nations, the United States, and other governments in improving the conduct of multilateral operations to assist police forces, courts, and prison systems in troubled states. This effort has already contributed to an increased understanding of this dimension of peace operations among members of U.S. civilian and military agencies as well as international and nongovernmental organizations. This book provides new insights that should help those charged with carrying out such operations become more effective in strengthening public security institutions in troubled countries. Richard A. Chilcoat Lieutenant General, U.S. Army President, National Defense University Acknowledgments The Institute for National Strategic Studies‘ project on Public Security and the New World Disorder originated with a May 1996 conference held by the U.S. Institute of Peace that examined the issue of police functions in peace operations. The resulting important work encouraged us to initiate an intensive year-long project using a series of case studies and involving both U.S. and international participants. The people whom the editors wish to thank for their participation and valuable insights are so numerous that we used an extensive database to keep track of them. In particular, we thank the U.S. Department of Defense offices of Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Affairs, Strategic Plans and Policy, and Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict; the U.S. State Department Office of Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Operations; the Global Issues and Multilateral Affairs office at the National Security Council; the International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program at the Department of Justice; and the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations and its Civilian Police Unit. Carnegie Corporation funded the first year of the project, with additional assistance provided by the John C. Whitehead Foundation and the U.S. Institute of Peace. The Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict, the Lester B. Pearson Canadian Peacekeeping Training Centre, and the National Defense University cohosted the concluding conference held September 15-16, 1997, at the National Defense University. Our final thanks go to the National Defense University Foundation. Their hard-working staff maintained a consistent level of funding for the entire project. Introduction MICHAEL J. DZIEDZIC The searing image of a U.S. soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu has defined for the American public, perhaps as much as any single event, the troubling character of the contemporary era. ―What in the World are we Doing?‖ the cover of Time demanded to know on behalf of an outraged nation11. Less than a year later, U.S. troops were again spearheading a multilateral coalition in the midst of chaos in Port au Prince. This time the defining image was an American soldier, pistol drawn, holding a seething Haitian mob at bay. Sprawled on the ground behind him was the intended recipient of popular justice. The photo caption reads, ―As Haitian police fade from view, U.S. troops are being drawn into conflict2.‖ Two years later, thousands of American peacekeeping troops had been deployed to Bosnia as part of a NATO-led peace operation. Among their duties was providing area security in the strategic Bosnian Serb controlled town of Brcko. In late August 1997, Brcko became the flash point of an internal power struggle in the Serb Republic (RS). Supporters of indicted war criminal Radovan Karadzic, incited by local radio broadcasts and air raid sirens, assaulted U.S. troops positioned there with rocks and ax handles for seeming to side with Karadzic‘s political rival. Two U.S. soldiers were wounded in the ensuing street violence, and U.N. civilian police (UNCIVPOL) had to be evacuated temporarily to nearby military bases3. These jarring images form a mosaic of the post-Cold War era and our reluctant role in it. In tandem with various coalition partners, we are confronting the uncertainties and peculiar challenges associated with policing a new sort of disorder in the world. Like it or not, contemporary use of the U.S. military instrument in peace operations has very often borne little resemblance to the high-intensity, high-tech battlefields that American soldiers, sailors, and airmen have been so well prepared to dominate. Indeed, the most frequent demands have come from the opposite end of the conflict spectrum, where the skills of the mediator are often more relevant and the essence of the mission is to rehabilitate, not annihilate. Among the more potent therapies for this new world disorder, whether administered prior to a crisis or during an international intervention, is for local institutions of public security—policemen, judges, and jailers—to begin functioning. Most military officers have been in uncharted territory when dealing with these matters, particularly when thrown into this complex task with a host of other international actors with whom they are largely unfamiliar (for example, relief workers, human rights monitors, election supervisors, and police trainers). Much of the early learning was on the job. Because the factors contributing to the ―new world disorder‖ are unlikely to diminish any time soon, it behooves the United States and the entire community of nations to refine our collective capacity to mount effective multilateral responses. This book is dedicated to the task of increasing international proficiency at coping with the distinctive challenge of restoring public security in war-torn or chaotic societies. There has been a great deal of study devoted to the military aspects of peacekeeping, but little attention has been given to the military contribution to the public security function. Through an examination of relevant recent experiences, we seek to extract useful insights and recommendations for those who must grapple with restoring public security during future peace missions. Peace Operations and the New World Disorder Historically, conflict between states has been a predominant source of concern for soldiers and statesmen. During the post-Cold War period, however, it has been anarchic conditions within the sovereign state that have repeatedly posed the most acute and intractable challenges to international order. Some notable internal conflicts that attracted international attention since 1989 had been exacerbated by superpower rivalry (Nicaragua, El Salvador, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique, Cambodia). More recently, however, the international community has been called upon to act purely in response to dysfunctional or disintegrating states (Somalia, Yugoslavia, Liberia, Haiti, Rwanda, Zaire, Albania). Throughout the present decade, most battlefields have been internal to individual states; very few conflicts have resulted from interstate warfare, the more traditional concern of statecraft. 4 Domestic disorder, of course, is not new. The essence of this problem in many Third World states is the fragility and decay of governmental institutions, especially those devoted to responding to citizen demands, preserving law and order, and resolving internal disputes. Domestic pressures, brought on by ethnic cleavages, overpopulation, poverty, maldistribution of wealth, environmental degradation, and rapid social mobilization often outpace and even overwhelm government ability to respond. When internal unrest either causes a government meltdown or provokes draconian spasms of repression, the consequences can spill over the border, destabilizing the surrounding region. In turn, transnational forces such as massive refugee migrations, guerrilla movements, and international criminal syndicates have increasingly been unleashed or exacerbated, threatening surrounding states. The humanitarian implications have also become more compelling. The specter of genocide or starvation, televised graphically to global audiences, has the demonstrated capacity to stir world opinion.