Africa Peace Review, Vol. 16, No1, 2020 Godwin Onu www.aprndc.com Arinze Ngwube ISSN 1118-7204 Nigeria’s Leadership Role in United Nations Peace Support Operations: Challenges and Prospects Godwin Onu Arinze Ngwube Abstract Nigeria has continued to play her role in peace support operations under the Keywords auspices of the UN, AU and ECOWAS. She is one of the troop-contributing countries with vast field countries. Nigeria was once the largest troop- Peace Support contributing nation on the continent and the fifth largest in the World to UNO Operations; PSO in 2013. Nigeria operates mainly within the sphere of troop contributors, Nigeria; but her status is declining when other countries like Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Leadership Ethiopia and Rwanda, among others, are reaping enormous political and financial gain from their significant contributions to PSO. It is expected that Nigeria should rise to new levels of peacekeeping not just participating by way of deploying troops as part of UN obligation to maintain peace and security in various parts of the world, but strategically utilizing her field experiences to shape new thinking on peacekeeping. This article answered some of the questions raised. Its source of data was essentially secondary literature, involving books, journals and articles on the subject matter. There is absence of coherent model for meeting contingent owned equipment requirements in adherence to UN standards, while the flow of information and communication between MOD and MFA as regard PSO is also incoherent. There is also an absence of a National Policy on PSO even though there has been a draft since 2010. Finally, Nigeria’s participation in PSO, together with her experiences and reputation, confers on her a credible case to lead new thinking about peace support operations, even though complex challenges may make it difficult for her to be recognized to take such lead. Introduction Nigerian is one of the traditional peacekeepers with vast experience and has demonstrated strengths in the United Nations (UN), African Union (AU) and Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Peace Support Operations. Nigeria has more than a credible case to lead as a driver of new thinking on Peace Support Operations in the twenty- first century. It would not be an over statement to argue that UN peace support operations (PSO) need new directional thinking in line with emerging threats and challenges in the field especially in the post-cold war era. Present day UN peace support operations are complex, not only because they are multifaceted, but they involve a combination of political, humanitarian and military roles. They need to be conducted in rough operational environments that are highly militarized. They are fashioned by an overwhelming presence of subjective elements such as perceptions, attitudes, cognition, psychological elements and personal experiences which negatively shape local behaviours and actions. Eliciting support and cooperation in these environments for the implementation of multifaceted peace support Godwin Onu & Arinze Ngwube Nigeria’s Leadership Role in United Nations Africa Peace Review, Vol. 16, No1, 2020 operation roles may not always be an easy task. Troops are being deployed in extremely complex and challenging environments. The overall management of UN PSO in such environments is extremely critical. The UN has been constantly criticized for formulating ‘unrealistic and confusing mandates’ for peacekeeping operations (Jha, 2009). The search for remedial action on some of the pressing issues in UN peacekeeping operations has been confined often to only certain sections of political leaders within the UN. Some of these leaders have an understanding of the problems but are not able to connect well with the practical realities of UN peacekeeping. Thus, several member states have reiterated the need in involving countries which contribute human and other resources in the formulation of mandates for peacekeeping operations. A representative to the UN noted that: Enlightened leadership with clear vision and with political courage in articulating the way the world has changed and the directional flow of the next cycle is needed. Such leadership within the UN Secretariat, within national governments and within non-governmental organizations will improve the quality of the United Nations so that it will be a transformed instrument for the benefit of the entire world’s people (Wadlow, 2010). It is not unusual to expect Nigeria to play a bigger role in UN Peacekeeping not just participating by way of deploying Nigerian troops as part of a UN force to keep peace in various parts of the world, but also by strategically maximizing her peacekeeping field experiences in shaping new thinking about peacekeeping. The nature of challenges and threats facing the world today has changed to such an extent that a new wave of thinking which is less dogmatic in its approach to peacekeeping is needed. Nigeria not only has demonstrated a capacity to make large and simultaneous troop commitments in many of these peace operations, but has also proved to be a reliable peacekeeper by taking huge risks to sustain her commitment in hazardous operations for prolonged periods. Nigeria’s strength lies in her capacity in undertaking peacekeeping in a way that meets some of the precedent needs emerging in the field today. Nigeria’s proactive contributions to UN peacekeeping have taken shape in pursuit of its political interests, such as realising its ambition as an emerging power in a globalizing world order and a strong desire for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. However, it is argued that although Nigeria’s peacekeeping strengths, experience and reputation provide more than a credible case for her leadership in UN peacekeeping, complex challenges may make it difficult for the country to assume such a role. What constitute these challenges and how can they be overcome or minimised to enable the country play its strategic leadership duties in UN peacekeeping? These issues constitute the main preoccupations of this paper. This paper is divided into five sections: Conceptual Clarification, Overview of Nigeria’s Participation in UN Peace Support Operations, Challenges to Nigeria’s Leadership and Reputation in UN Peace Support Operations, Recommendations and the Conclusion. Is there a case for Nigeria’s role? What informs Nigeria’s proactive commitment to UN peacekeeping? What is Nigeria’s reputation in UN Peace Support Operations? 39 Godwin Onu & Arinze Ngwube Nigeria’s Leadership Role in United Nations Africa Peace Review, Vol. 16, No1, 2020 Conceptual Clarification The concept of Peace Support Operations (PSO) originated out of the challenges posed by failing states in the post-cold war era in an uncertain and evolving global security environment. The former traditional peacekeeping was done in tolerant environments where it was easier to obtain the consent and the support of the host governments. The redefinition of the contemporary peacekeeping force is aimed at acquiring capabilities appropriate for the challenges of internal conflicts and civil wars. PSOs are practical mechanisms devised to contain armed conflicts and facilitate their resolution by peaceful means. To enhance the understanding of PSO, Mackinlay (2013) argues that in semi consensual and turbulent environments, new concepts and training methods are needed. This claim was further strengthened when the US Presidential Decision Directive 25 used the term ‘peace operation’ or ‘peace support operations’ to cover the entire spectrum of activities from traditional peacekeeping to peace enforcement. In that regard, Wilkinson (2007) defines PSO as “a term first used by the military to cover both peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations, but is now used widely to embrace in addition those other peace related operations, which include conflict prevention, peacemaking, peace building and humanitarian assistance, among others.” However, the British Joint Warfare (1997) defines PSO as: A multi-functional operation involving military forces, diplomatic and humanitarian agencies. They are designed to achieve humanitarian goals or a long term political settlement and are conducted impartially in support of an appropriate mandate. These include peacekeeping, peace enforcement, conflict prevention, peacemaking, peace building and humanitarian operations. The UN, on its part, sees PSO as an operation that impartially uses diplomatic, civil and military means, normally in pursuit of UN charter purposes and principles to restore and maintain peace. Such operations may include conflict prevention or preventive diplomacy, peacemaking, peace enforcement, peacekeeping and peace building operations. However, Obiakor (2016) defines PSO as multifunctional operations in which impartial military activities are designed to create a secure environment and to facilitate the efforts of the civilian elements of the mission to create a self-sustaining peace. Penap (2009), in support of this view, says PSOs are organized by multinational, regional or sub regional organizations but based on bilateral agreements between countries. It is coordinated at the global, regional or sub regional levels under the auspices of various organizations. Some of these organizations include the UN, AU, ECOWAS, SADC, OSCE and NATO. He explains how the UN employs PSO as a means to advance world peace and security. Angbazo (2015) corroborates this by stating that PSO is a multifunctional operation