From the UN News Center:

The United Nations is on target to deploy a mainly African hybrid peace force in the war-wracked Sudanese region of Darfur on schedule, but needs more offers from countries on critical capacities such as aviation and ground transport, a senior UN peacekeeping official said today.

Jane Holl Lute, acting head of the new Department of Field Support, told reporters that "we are hitting the target of a predominantly African force," outlined in last week's Security Council resolution authorizing the creation of the hybrid operation, to be known as UNAMID.

As noted below, the Security Council approved a new resolution establishing the 26,000-strong United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur, UNAMID. Remember that acronym, because for the next many months the central tasks facing the international community on Darfur will center around: 1) actually raising the requisite troops for UNAMID; 2) providing UNAMID with a steady funding stream; 3) making sure Khartoum actually permits UNAMID troops to enter Darfur.

None of these challenges will be easy. The Secretary General cannot wave a magic wand and summon peacekeepers -- rather, he must depend on the contributions of member states. Also, at $2 billion this mission will be the most expensive peacekeeping operation in the world -- and cash is not exactly in surplus at UN Peacekeeping. Still, this resolution presents a major step forward. In every previous Security Council resolution on Darfur, China (which has extensive financial and business relations with Khartoum)had helped to water down the text, only to abstain in the end. But this time, China voted for, rather than abstained from the resolution.

To be sure, at China's request the council dropped the threat of sanctions. But it kept intact harsh language under Chapter VII of the UN Charter--which permits the use of force in the event of Khartoum's non-compliance. This is a big step forward in Chinese diplomacy toward Sudan.

The Security Council -- for the very first time -- is unified around sending peacekeepers to Darfur. With China finally on board, it will be much, much harder for Khartoum to resist signing a status of forces agreement with the UN.

Jane Holl Lute, Officer-in-Charge of the Department of Field Support--which works with the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO)--says that investigating misconduct allegations against peacekeepers is a high UN priority.

"We are not turning a blind eye to any activity anywhere," said Lute. "When investigations are conducted and it is demonstrated that the allegations are founded, we will take action."

The UN has imposed a zero-tolerance policy against sexual abuse and exploitation in response to numerous allegations of peacekeeping misconduct.

More

From the UN News Center:

Acting on the findings of an internal investigation conducted by the United Nations Mission in Cote d'Ivoire (UNOCI) which revealed serious allegations of widespread sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers there, the world body has suspended the contingent concerned, a spokesperson announced today.

The UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) is currently conducting a full investigation, but the UN has decided to suspend the contingent's activities and has cantoned the unit within its base, UN spokesperson Michele Montas told reporters.

"The United Nations reiterates its zero tolerance policy towards sexual exploitation and abuse and stresses its determination to work with our troop and police contributing countries to ensure that all UN personnel are held accountable to the highest standards of behaviour," she said.

These are obviously very serious allegations. You can read more about the UN's zero tolerance policy on sexual abuse and watch Assistant Secretary General Jane Holl Lute discuss how the UN responds to allegations of sexual abuse among peacekeepers.

There was some good news for the Price of Peace campaign yesterday. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee endorsed S-392, which would increase the amount the United States pays in dues to support UN peacekeeping missions. The United States is assessed at 26% of the UN's peacekeeping budget, but over the years has not paid that amount in full, resulting in the accumulation of significant arrearages. If the legislation is signed into law, it would be a significant boon to UN peacekeeping, which requires additional financial resources to keep up with its ever expanding number of missions.

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joe Biden summed up the importance of the legislation rather succintly, "At a time when we are seeking a robust U.N. force in Darfur, and are relying on U.N. peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, we should pay our dues in full." Hear! Hear!

Six Spanish peacekeepers in southern Lebanon were killed over the weekend in an apparent car bombing. These deaths are the first peacekeeper fatalities since UNIFIL expanded its operations in southern Lebanon following last summer's war between Israel and Hezbollah forces. The culprits are unknown at this point. Hezbollah has condemned the attacks. But Fatah al-Islam--the militant group battling the Lebanese army forces in a refugee camp near Beirut--has previously accused UNIFIL of attacking the camp, so it would seem they are the target of immediate suspicions.

These fatalities highlight the unique force structure of peacekeeping in Lebanon. UNIFIL does not quite resemble other peacekeeping missions, where soldiers from South Asian countries typically make up the bulk of the forces. UNIFIL, out of design, is predominantly European. As a condition of the August 14, 2006 ceasefire agreement, the Israeli government demanded that countries with sophisticated military capacities help fill the security void once Israel withdrew its own soldiers. Sending American troops there was a non-starter, so France, Spain, Italy and other European countries stepped up. The deaths over the weekend are a sad reminder of Europe's commitment to help keep the peace in the second-most volatile country in the Middle East.

As previously posted, the House debated the State, Foreign Ops appropriations bill yesterday. Included after the jump are some pertinent moments from the debate.

During debate on Representative Virginia Foxx's amendment to reduce the appropriation for contributions to international organizations by $203,082,000, which failed by recorded vote 137 to 287:

Ms. FOXX. The purpose of my amendment is twofold. First, it would help bring accountability to organizations that have demonstrated limited effectiveness. Second, this amendment would help control the out-of-control Federal deficit...

I wonder what our constituents would think if they knew they were being forced to pay millions for perpetual, never-ending funding increases for organizations such as the International Bureau for Weights and Measures, the International Coffee Association, the International Copper Study Group, the International Hydrographic Organization, the International Lead and Zinc Study Group, the International Rubber Study Group, and the World Organization for Animal Health.

Given the tremendous amount of funding contained in the bill for the United Nations, I am particularly interested in encouraging that body to reexamine its spending habits so it can be more effective at fulfilling its mission....

As most would agree, the purpose of the United Nations is to help promote peace and security throughout the world. However, it has obviously failed miserably in that respect. Iran's nuclear weapons program is still chugging along at a rapid pace, threatening Israel and the entire region. Genocide persists in Sudan. All of the minds at the United Nations can't even agree on a definition for the word “terrorism” in an age where terrorism remains one of the biggest threats to humanity and civilization....

Furthermore, despite the implicit purpose of the United Nations Human Rights Council to promote global human rights, this body has among its membership notorious human rights abusers such as Angola, China, Cuba, Egypt, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Iran serves as the Vice Chair of the U.N. Disarmament Commission, Syria is the Rapporteur of the U.N. Disarmament Commission, Zimbabwe is the Chair of the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, and Sudan serves on the Executive Committee of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees....

And if that wasn't enough, an examination of a ranked list of countries subject to the most U.N. condemnation for human rights violations in 2006 reveals Israel ranking first, having received 135 actions, nearly twice as many as Sudan, the next country listed, and more than the number of actions directed at Iran, China, Colombia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Syria combined. The United States ranks fourth on this list, having been subject to 38 actions. This indicates that the United Nations is more interested in condemning Israel and the United States than it is in horrendous human rights abusers throughout the world.

Mrs. LOWEY. This amendment fails to realistically address the effect our arrears have on our standing in the world community. At a time when the United States is increasingly relying on international organizations to further our security interests around the world, shortchanging our treaty-obligated contributions to these organizations undercuts our foreign policy goals and undermines our reputation around the world.

It also countermands our new Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad's call to pay our dues in full and on time. As of today, the United States is $291 million in arrears at the U.N. for regular budget contributions alone. The United States has chosen to belong to each of these organizations. They leverage U.S. taxpayer dollars and advance a wide range of U.S. foreign policy objectives, including monitoring nuclear proliferation through the IAEA, creating norms for international telecommunications through the ITU, and fending off global pandemics through the WHO....

This amendment has no appreciation of the influence this increasing trend of paying late and underfunding international organizations has on our ability to sway others and it is difficult to justify why our priorities should be given full consideration when we chronically pay our dues late. Paying these international organizations late is counterproductive to achieving United States international security goals. The increasing trend of paying late and underfunding international organizations confounds U.S. demands for better management in them.

An example of this detrimental effect is seen at the World Health Organization which reports that the arrears owed by the United States are preventing well-managed budgets and resulting in programs not reaching optimal effectiveness for a year or more after they were planned to be fully operational.

Further, other dues-paying countries take note when the United States fails to honor its commitments in these international organizations. As a result, our influence on making budgetary and policy decisions in them is lessened.

For example, the U.S. consistently wants the Food and Agriculture Organization to increase its capacity to set worldwide food and plant standards, yet it is very difficult to justify why U.S. priorities for the FAO should be given full consideration when the U.S. is chronically paying its dues there about a year late.

Ms. FOXX. The U.N. is an ineffective and corrupt organization and our continuing to provide much of its funding implicitly endorses that corruption and ineffectiveness. If we put this to a vote of the American people, they would say, fund nothing of the United Nations. Keeping this at level funding is the right thing to do.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Well, here we go again, cutting a multilateral account that allows us to hold our head up high in the international community as we organize the international community in the global war on terror in favor of unilateralism.

To fight the war on terror, we must be multilateral and not unilateral. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Khalilzad said pay our dues on time and pay it in full. Every time there's a crisis that confronts our country, we run to the U.N., we run to the international community demanding their involvement to help provide security for the American people.

Mr. WOLF. I rise in opposition to the amendment. Everyone has frustrations. I think the U.N. could do certainly a lot more on Darfur and many of the other things. They stood by and frankly didn't do very much in Rwanda, either. But what this amendment would do, I think, is people have to look at it. This would actually cut NATO fees, and NATO is sort of the backbone of what we're doing in Afghanistan and many other places, but particularly $41 million out of this fund goes to NATO.

Also, on the World Health Organization with regard to avian flu and things like that, this is not the time to do that. Also, there is another issue that I have personally made a cause, of funding the war crime tribunals to bring people to justice. This would cut the war crimes tribunal in Rwanda where over 800,000 people have died between the Hutus and the Tutsis and that whole issue. Also the former Yugoslavia where after the genocide that took place, Milosevic was brought to the court.

So for those reasons, I understand what the gentlelady is trying to do. But I think this would be the wrong place to kind of do it, from NATO and IAEA and the World Health Organization and the war crimes tribunal.

During debate on Representative Scott Garrett's amendment to reduce funding for international organizations by $20 and transfer the money to anti-terrorism programs, which failed by recorded vote: 192-232.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Despite the fact that the world is in the throes of the violence of terrorism, the U.N. has done so very little to fight this threat on humanity.

The U.N. marks progress against terrorism by how many committees they have formed and how many documents have been signed. We need a world body that does not consider an expanded bureaucracy as success. We need a world body that is a partner in the war on terror.

Instead, the U.N. spends its time passing toothless resolutions on counter terrorism that even countries such as Iran, Libya, and Syria can support. These nations will continue to funnel money to terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Mahdi Army knowing that there will be absolutely no repercussions from the U.N.

If the U.N. is unwilling to join the fight against terrorism, we should reallocate our dollars, reallocate a portion of the funds intended for them to programs which are truly working to bring real peace to the world.

Mrs. LOWEY. This amendment would cut $20 million from the contributions for international organizations. The question posed by this amendment is straightforward: Do you want to take funds away from an account that is saving lives every day around the world?

Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last year told Senate appropriators that U.N. peacekeeping was an example of the benefit of empowering partner nations, and it would cost the United States taxpayers almost eight times as much.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. What we are trying to do is not, as in a subsequent amendment where we will be taking funds from the peacekeeping mission, which is what the gentlelady was referring to here, instead is to take money from the U.N. international organization line and redesignate those $20 million to join us in the fight against terrorism.

Mrs. LOWEY. I do think that your offset, taking money from U.N. dues, is actually unwise and not a very good policy decision.

Many people have criticized the U.N., want to disband the U.N., want to cut off dues to the U.N., and then when we need the U.N., they wonder: What are we going to do if we didn't have a United Nations?

I look forward to working with the gentleman from New Jersey in strengthening the committees of the U.N. and working together to face the tremendous challenges we have internationally. So I support the gentleman's concerns about nuclear nonproliferation, and I look forward to working with the gentleman; but I strongly oppose taking the money from U.N. dues.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, let me be clear, we are in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I understand that the gentleman is going to withdraw his amendment, but let me be clear, the various international organizations for which this account is designated and the dues that we pay not only to the U.N. but to other member organizations that our country is a part of, believe me when I tell you, the State Department has made it very clear in each of those organizations that we are in a global war on terror and our contributions to those organizations, part of our mandatory obligations to those organizations for which the gentleman seeks to cut funding, would quite frankly undermine our ability to maintain our own status within those international organizations as we try to direct the global war on terror...

Sufficient in this bill are the resources to advance democracy activities and demining activities, but by cutting aid to international organizations and contributions, cutting our contribution, our mandatory contribution to those organizations, is something that I believe the chairman and the majority would reject.

Today the House continues to consider the State, Foreign Ops Appropriations bill (streaming video), which includes funding for UN peacekeeping. House Appropriators added $195 million for peacekeeping in committee to help address U.S. arrears (which could reach $1 billion this year). That funding could possibly be under attack, and there will likely be many amendments offered that address issues of diplomacy and multilateralism.

As you may recall, the President's budget request shorted U.S. funding for UN peacekeeping in FY 2008 by $500 million and failed to address $569 million in already existing arrears, threatening to put the U.S. more than $1 billion into arrears before the end of the year. In comparison to the Department of Defense budget (over $450 billion not including the supplemental spending for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan) this may not seem like much, but it represents 20% of the UN's total peacekeeping budget for 2008 and forces the UN and troop-contributing nations to face resource shortfalls for critical operations in Darfur, Lebanon, and Haiti. Moreover it leaves key allies--notably India, Kenya, Pakistan, and Bangladesh--who send troops and ship equipment in support of new U.S.-supported UN peacekeeping operations holding unpaid invoices and threatens to further damage the U.S. image abroad.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Washington, DC yesterday in an effort to seek support for reducing the U.S. deficit in peacekeeping dues.

"He's meeting with congressional leaders, mostly talking about peacekeeping funding," said Deborah DeYoung, information officer for the United Nations Information Centre in Washington.

"He's been here twice before this year, and probably be coming back and forth a good bit. It's a new era, and he's keen to get to know people and keen to let them know his priorities."

The timing of Ban's trip coincided with the Better World Campaign--which gave the House of Representatives a petition on Tuesday signed by 32,000 people from all 50 states urging Congress to pay off $569 million in arrears.

More

On Wednesday, the House Subcommittee on International Organizations held a hearing (video) on UN peacekeeping forces acting as a force multiplier for the U.S. with testimony from Tim Wirth, President of the UN Foundation; James Dobbins, Director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at RAND and a former Assistant Secretary of State; Joseph Christoff, Director of International Affairs and Trade at the GAO; and Steven Groves, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

All in all, the hearing was positive for those who support the work of UN peacekeeping and believe that, because the UN is vital to U.S. national security, the U.S. should pay its full arrears. Chairman Bill Delahunt led off the hearing with the assertion that UN peacekeeping forces are a force multiplier and offer the U.S. "more bang for the buck," pointing to the oft-quoted GAO report that he and Congressman Rohrabacher requested last year. (Christoff testified about this report in depth.) He also mentioned that the "U.S. military is stretched to its breaking point" and that the UN could go where the U.S. might not be welcome, but where it has national security interests. He offered the UN force in Lebanon as an example, postulating that a U.S. force in the same position would engage in combat almost daily and suffer terrorist attacks. He finished by saying that this is not merely an academic argument. The U.S. is voting for all of these missions in the Security Council, but not fully paying for them, even as the international community is preparing to create the largest and most complex peacekeeping mission in history (the impending mission to Darfur).

Dobbins echoed Delahunt's support for peacekeeping, but took a more analytical approach. He began by pointing out that no country has as much experience in nation-building as the U.S., who undertook its seventh such commitment this decade in Iraq. Yet, he asked, "How can we do it so often and so badly?" This, according to Dobbins, was the impetus for RAND's reports comparing U.S.-led and UN peacekeeping efforts, which concluded that the UN is more effective at maintaining peace, building democracy, and facilitating the return of refugees mainly because the UN has done a better job of learning from its mistakes over the past 15 years. In fact, he said, contrary to popular belief, the incidence of civil war was cut in half between 1993 and 2003 and the number of war casualties worldwide decreased by an even greater percentage over the same time period. Despite escalations in Darfur and Iraq, the UN's work in sub-Saharan Africa has been the main factor in bringing those numbers down. Dobbins conceded early failings in places like Somalia and Rwanda when the number of UN peacekeeping first skyrocketed in the early 1990s, but pointed to the UN's increased professionalism and experience that resulted in later successes, including Sierra Leone, Mozambique, Burundi, Liberia, Namibia, Congo, Angola, and East Timor.

Dobbins also suggests that, because the Iraq war has been so difficult, American citizens might not support new stabilization efforts in the near future, but these efforts will, nonetheless be essential to American security. For this reason, among others, UN peacekeeping will be vital.

Wirth began with facts and figures also, suggesting that the U.S. has already spent more this week in Iraq than it will all year on UN peacekeeping and "it's only Wednesday." Stressing the importance of a strong U.S.-UN relationship, he said "the UN works when the U.S. wants it to. The UN has always been a key element of U.S. foreign policy, and, when the U.S. pays attention and pays its bills, the UN is both a bargain and an opportunity." He continued, delineating six key aspects of the U.S.-UN relationship:

• UN peacekeeping brings two types of burden-sharing to the table, financial ("when the U.S. puts 25 cents toward a UN peacekeeping mission, the rest of the world adds 75 cents") and keeping U.S. troops out of harm's way.
• UN peacekeeping is cost effective (the GAO suggests that UN peacekeeping is eight times less expensive for American taxpayers).
• "Peacekeeping is probably the most important laboratory for UN reform," Wirth said, "Progress has been made, and important further recommendations have been proposed by the new Secretary-General. These will require persistent, diplomatic support from the U.S., and the new U.S. Permanent Representative has made an impressive start."
• Americans see UN peacekeeping as an avenue of reengagement with the rest of the world.
• "The growth in both the size and importance of UN peacekeeping logically leads to a re-examination of the role that the U.S. agrees to play in it, and how the U.S. should be planning for the future," Wirth said. He suggested that the Subcommittee should be pressing the State Department on these questions.
• There will inevitably eventually be a phase out of the American presence in Iraq. The UN is the most logical candidate to fill that vacuum. Wirth suggests that we need to start thinking about how that will happen and what it will look like.

At the end of his testimony, Wirth brought the discussion back to U.S. arrears to the UN (which will probably reach $1 billion by 2008). Wirth asked, rhetorically, "Where will the billion dollars come from?...The UN doesn't have a bank it can go to for financing. The methodology for getting others to pay is simple: the UN just doesn't pay those who have agreed to send their own troops and ship their own equipment in support of new peacekeeping operations - they are left holding unpaid invoices." He included a list of those nations, "India and Pakistan, close friends of the U.S. and two of the most reliable providers of UN peacekeeping help, are together owed more than $109 million; Bangladesh, one of the poorest countries in the world, is owed $77 million; Nigeria has been the most dependable and far-reaching face for stability in Africa and is owed $3.4 million; Brazil, our very close friend, is owed $7.2 million for its peacekeeping efforts in Haiti, 90 miles off our coast."

Ranking Member Dana Rohrabacher did offer a healthy dose of criticism, suggesting that UN troops were ill-equipped and ill-trained compared to U.S. troops. Christoff spoke to this issue, saying that the highest caliber is not always necessary. UN peacekeeping has clearly been successful in many conflict zones--areas where U.S. troops will now not need to be deployed. Dobbins agreed, saying that UN peacekeeping, at its current level of efficiency, is still a bargain.

The UN's efforts to address sexual abuse and exploitation by UN peacekeepers was also a popular topic. Many of Rohrabacher's and Groves's concerns were related to the responsibility of troop-contributing countries to punish abusive troops. Dobbins mentioned that the U.S. would likely oppose a move to grant the UN authority to punish peacekeeping personnel. He also retorted that we have yet to punish coalition partners or contractors for committing or failing to prosecute improper activities in Iraq.

Although Delahunt got Groves to admit that several UN peacekeeping missions, including those in Haiti and Lebanon, are in the U.S. national interest, Groves remained adamant that U.S. taxpayers should not have to pay the arrears because the UN has yet to reform to a proper standard. Both Dobbins and Wirth pointed out that the U.S. has every opportunity to stop any UN peacekeeping mission from being created or extended. In fact, the existence of every peacekeeping mission requires the consent of the United States. Dobbins said that because of the way the Security Council is set up, if the U.S. wants a peacekeeping mission, other countries will pay 74 percent of the cost even if they don't want to, whereas, if the U.S. doesn't want a mission, it doesn't happen.

In last week's Keeping the Peace installment on Haiti I wrote about the UN Peacekeeping mission's trend toward more assertive tactics in the troubled slums of Port-au-Prince. Since February, the Brazilian-led force launched incursions into Cite-Soleil, the vast sea-side slum, to arrest leaders of organized criminal groups that run extortion rackets on the local population. Yesterday, according to the UN News Service, they nabbed another top dog.

A long-hunted Haitian gang leader accused of assassinations, kidnappings and extortion was arrested today in a joint operation by Haitian National Police and United Nations peacekeepers in Cité Soleil, the notorious slum area in the capital, Port-au-Prince.

The arrest of Torchon Jean Eoldy, alias Blade Nasson, who terrorized the neighbourhoods of Ti-Haïti and Linteau, is a part of "the joint efforts of the blue helmets and the PNH to return a lasting peace to Cité Soleil," according to the UN Mission in Haiti, known as MINUSTAH.

"It will, in particular, allow the population of Linteau and Ti-Haiti to get back little by little to normal life," the mission noted in a press release.

More.

Yesterday, the Security Council asked the Secretary General to start contingency planning for a possible peacekeeping force in Somalia. Britain's UN ambassador Emyr-Jones Parry explains:

"Let's be clear, the Security Council report sets out the conditionality for deploying a force ... and there (first) should be sufficient peace to keep. At the moment, those conditions are not met."

"Our hope is that the situation in Mogadishu is stabilizing and the violence there will come to an end, and that you can provide within the next months a degree of stability and political outreach in the country. If the situation continues to improve sufficiently, the U.N. would then be prepared to consider whether or not it should deploy."

There some frequent misconceptions about peacekeeping, one being that blue helmets can be deployed to stop a war in progress. The United Nations tried this in the 1990s in places like Bosnia, but found that it does not work. Rather, for a peacekeeping mission to be successful, warring parties must be amenable to peacekeepers' deployment. Peacekeepers are deployed to keep the peace, not impose one.

In Somalia, peacekeepers cannot fight their way into Mogadishu. Rather, there must first be agreement by the belligerents to cease hostilities. Only then can peacekeepers provide the necessary security to oversee the country's political and physical rehabilitation.

Following East Timor's independence from Indonesia in 1999, the Security Council authorized a peacekeeping operation in East Timor to stabilize the new country and rehabilitate its fractured government bureaucracies. Kofi Annan sent one of his most able diplomats, the late Sergio Vieira de Mello, to oversee East Timor reconstruction. The UN then began an ambitious set of capacity building efforts, including training Timorese to fill basic bureaucratic structures and training a judiciary. (This latter job was no easy task. As James Traub recounts in The Best Intentions, there was not a single lawyer in the county at the time.)

The United Nations also oversaw elections in East Timor. It now seems that the young country will reach another milestone as voters stood in long lines this week to cast ballots in a new presidential election. The results are still being tallied, and will not likely be known until Wednesday.

Crucially, the elections occurred without incident. This is an encouraging sign because ten months ago a brief spate of violence threatened to metastasize and reverse hard fought reconstruction gains. At the time, a speedy deployment of Australian military forces calmed the situation before it spiraled out of control. Today, it seems that the security situation is improved to the point that Australia has signaled that it may pull its remaining 1,000 troops from East Timor following a set of parliamentary elections later this year.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's Special Representative, Alan Doss told the all-female peacekeeping unit in Liberia that "we know from police experience around the world that women officers are good at handling potentially violent situations."

"I am quite confident that with your help we can maintain a peaceful, stable and violence-free environment in Liberia," Mr. Doss told the unit made up 105 female officers with 20 male supporting staff - the first largely female Formed Police Unit to be deployed to a UN peacekeeping operation.

More

Two weeks ago, several hundred Brazilian peacekeepers raided the gang-infested sea side slum of Cite Soleil, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. (You can read about the offensive here and here.) So far, the raids have successfully rooted out some of the major organized criminal elements of Cite Soleil. In yet another sign of progress, UN Peacekeepers have transformed the headquarters of the most notorious gang leaders into a free medical clinic for the long suffering residents of the neighborhood.

More.

In a report to the Security Council on Tuesday, the Secretary General outlined two possible peacekeeping options for eastern Chad, where the spillover from the conflict in Darfur is threatening the lives of refugees and civilians caught in the crossfire.

From Edith Lederer of the Associated Press:

"Ban proposed two possible military options for Chad - a 6,000-strong force backed by 20 helicopters and an observation aircraft and a 10,900-strong force backed by 11 helicopters and two observation aircraft. He also proposed that some 800 Chadian police be loaned to a U.N. peacekeeping operation to help protect a dozen refugee camps and key towns where Chadians have fled, along with 260 international police."

Ban did not request outright that the Security Council approve such a mission. But if the Council does decide to send peacekeepers to Chad, one would have to worry about over-taxing UN peacekeeping. As was written in the most recent installment of the UNF Insights essay series, the demand for peacekeeping is outpacing the availability of resources to implement Security Council dictates. Without the requisite financial and logistical support from member states, the United Nations would be hard-pressed to find peacekeepers to form a new force in Chad.

Ten days ago, the peacekeeping force attached to the United Nations Mission in Haiti began incursions into gang infested neighborhoods in Port-au-Prince, with orders to arrest leaders of the organized criminal groups that terrorize the impoverished Cite-Soleil neighborhood. As the AP reports, it would seem that this campaign has shown some early signs of success. Peacekeepers on Monday arrested one Johnny Pierre Louis, a gang leader wanted in connection to the reprisal murders of two other gang members who had agreed to participate in a UN sponsored disarmament program. The program, administered by MINUSTAH (as the UN's Haiti mission is known), promises economic aid and job training in return for gang members relinquishing their arms.

Though Louis was arrested, the shadowy top leader of the criminal network rooted in Cite-Soleil, who is known only as "Evans," is still on the loose. However, according to a rather detailed article about the raids (from Jacqueline Charles of McClatchy newspapers) UN peacekeepers now control about 20% of Cite Soleil, including the school house that served as Evans' headquarters. Evans is apparently on the run and has contacted Haitian authorities promising to turn over his guns.

These early tactical successes bode well for MINUSTAH's decision to take more robust and assertive action against organized crime in Haiti's slums. Of course, no one should be sanguine about the prospects for a swift turnabout in the quality of life in Cite-Soleil. Still, early returns would show that MINUSTAH's forceful posture is paying off for the embattled residents of Haiti's poorest district.

Marc Lacey's Sunday New York Times piece describing UN peacekeepers' recent incursions into the gang-infested Cite-Soleil neighborhood of Port-au-Prince sheds some light into the difficult task blue-helmets face in Haiti. There are 8,000 mostly Jordanian and Brazilian blue-helmets in Haiti. And as the Times piece explains, they are starting to stake a more aggressive posture against organized criminal groups that terrorize urban slums and threaten the democratically-elected Preval government. Heavily armed UN troops are acting as a constabulary force, going block-by-block to apprehend crime bosses in order to make life more tolerable for the residents of Port-au-Prince.

Because Haiti is so close to American shores, it stands as a sharp example of how peacekeepers can take on a role that would otherwise fall to American soldiers.

Perhaps more so than other peacekeeping operations, success or failure in Haiti will have a direct impact on life in the United States. A collapse in Haiti could prompt refugees flooding American shores, as happened in the early 1990s. And reverberations from state collapse in Haiti would have a profound effect on the large Haitian diaspora communities in major American cities, which would no doubt shoulder the cost of absorbing new refugees.

In an episode recalled in James Traub's book The Best Intentions: Kofi Annan and the UN in the Era of American World Power, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told then-Secretary General Annan in late 2004, "There are six thousand Brazilian troops in Haiti. If they weren't, there would be six thousand marines." The General Accountability Office backed this view with a detailed study comparing Haiti's UN mission to a hypothetical American deployment there. The study found the UN mission in Haiti achieves its objectives while being eight-times less expensive than a comparable deployment of US marines.

Indeed, the important and cost-effective work of UN peacekeeping in Haiti underscores how crucial it is for the United States to pay its peacekeeping obligations in full. As congress debates the White House budget request (which short-changes peacekeeping) members would be wise to draw the connection between the budget they pass and the crucial burden-sharing role UN peacekeeping plays in places like Haiti.

The new issue of UNF Insights is now available online (pdf). But first, some trivia:

How many UN peacekeepers are deployed around the world?

In which country are the largest number of peacekeepers deployed?

What country is the largest contributor of peacekeepers around the world?

There are about 6,600 troops in Haiti, from which two countries do the bulk of these peacekeepers hail?

How does the United Nations pay for peacekeeping operations around the globe?

How much does the United Nations Peacekeeping reimburse a troop contributing country per soldier, per month?

In August, the Security Council voted for three new peacekeeping missions. In which countries would these new missions be deployed?

For the answers, read the new UNF Insights. The issue investigates the role of UN peacekeeping operations around the globe and finds that after some setbacks in the 1990's peacekeeping is now building a successful track-record in some of the world's hottest conflict zones. It also finds that because of these successes (and because much of the western world's militaries are committed in Iraq and Afghanistan) UN peacekeeping is increasingly in demand. The question, therefore, is whether or not member states will meet their financial obligations to peacekeeping so as to sustain peacekeeping's recent successes.

For more on why member countries would be wise to fully support UN peacekeeping, read the report in full.

105 Indian police officers, set to be deployed to Liberia, make up the UN's first all-female peacekeeping group.

Seema Dhundia, a unit commander, said "Women police are seen to be much less threatening, although they can be just as tough as men. But in a conflict situation, they are more approachable and it makes women and children feel safer." More

As reported yesterday, while in Washington this week Ban Ki-moon asked Congressional leaders to lift the so-called "peacekeeping cap" that Congress imposed on US contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget back in 2000. Since then, the US has been assessed at a rate higher than what it pays, resulting in constant budget shortfalls at the UN.

This is a long and complicated saga, but here's the elevator pitch version:

In 2000, the United States agreed to an assessment scale for peacekeeping operations in which the United States would pay 27% of the total peacekeeping budget. Congress, however, passed legislation capping United States peacekeeping dues at 25%. The cap has been lifted every two years until 2005. Still, this two percent gap has resulted in the accumulation of significant American arrears in peacekeeping. If US contributions to UN peacekeeping remain static, American backlogs would exceed $515 million by 2007.

These arrears have real consequences. The annual budget for UN peacekeeping is only about $5 billion. This funds 16 peacekeeping missions in the world, fielding over 97,000 troops, police, and military observers and civilian staff. And in recent months, peacekeeping has experienced a new surge, with the Security Council authorizing new missions in Lebanon, East Timor, and Darfur. If implemented in full, peacekeeping costs would jump by about 40%.

Few doubt the importance of these new missions. But they can hardly be sustained (or, in the case of Darfur get off the ground) without the necessary funding. The new Congress would be wise to heed Ban's plea.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said yesterday that he has called on U.S. President George W. Bush and Congressional leaders to drop their spending cap on UN peacekeeping, noting that the limited funding creates "very difficult constraints in smoothly carrying out peacekeeping operations."

"The US Government is the largest financial contributor to the regular budget, as well as the peacekeeping operations budget. The US Congress has imposed a cap of 25 percent in peacekeeping operations...I have raised this issue in my meetings with President Bush and all the Congressional leaders. I strongly appealed and requested that the US Congress lift this spending cap...They said they will discuss this matter." More

For a transcript of Ban's remarks to the press, click here.

The United Nations is taking some hits over a disturbing Daily Telegraph report alleging that some peacekeeping officials in the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) have sexually exploited children in southern Sudan.

There are about 13,000 UN personnel in southern Sudan, overseeing a two-year-old peace accord that ended a bloody 20 year civil war in Sudan. The new Secretary General has pledged to investigate thoroughly these allegations and has re-affirmed the UN's policy of "zero tolerance, zero complacency and zero impunity" for sexual exploitation.

However, one of the paradoxes of peacekeeping is that the United Nations has no legal authority of its own to prosecute individual troops. Unlike conventional militaries, such as the United States Army which can prosecute serving soldiers under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the United Nations is not vested with sovereign legal authority to charge peacekeepers with a crime and lock them up. Rather, when allegations of misconduct are substantiated, the UN orders that the accused be repatriated. It is up to the each home country to decide if and how to prosecute their own nationals.

Meanwhile, the actions of a few peacekeepers should not serve as an indictment of the UN mission in Southern Sudan. With peacekeepers maintaining a stable security environment there, other UN agencies have been able to maximize their ability to deliver key services to the people of southern Sudan. The World Food Program, for example, announced that it plans to feed two million people there this year.

"A ceasefire and political talks must take place in Sudan's Darfur region before an international military force there could guarantee security, the head of U.N. peacekeeping said on Tuesday.

Jean-Marie Guehenno said the international community must demand assurances an African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur would be effective before it offered funding and equipment." More

Plus: Darfur is in 'free fall'

"The United Nations plans to become more deeply involved in efforts to end the Lord's Resistance Army's reign of terror in northern Uganda, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said on Monday.

The LRA, which says it wants to rule Uganda according to the biblical Ten Commandments, has become notorious for massacring civilians, mutilating survivors and abducting thousands of children as fighters, porters and sex slaves.

About 100,000 people have been killed and nearly 2 million more driven from their homes and into camps in 20 years of brutal war waged by the group in northern Uganda, the U.N. Security Council said two weeks ago." More

In the New Republic online, Peter Beinart has written a not-to-be missed essay touting the successful nation building strategies the United Nations has been quietly developing without much fanfare here in the United States.

For the record, what Beinart calls "nation building" the United Nations would likely call "peace building." But the intent is the same: to help restore national institutions in a country torn apart by conflict. To that end, Beinart uses the UN's recent logistical accomplishments in the Congolese elections as an entry into a discussion of the future of nation building in the face of America's experience in Iraq.

He hits all the main points. As a result of Iraq, says Beinart, Americans may have a declining appetite for ambitious nation building projects. However, the United Nations is poised to fill that gap. As Beinart notes, the UN has a capacity to oversee complex nation/peace building operations that is unparalleled by any government on its own; long serving expert staff in areas as diverse as justice sector development and election management makes the UN uniquely suited to take on these tasks in societies emerging from conflict.

Peacekeepers are the core of these kinds of operations. And perhaps the one point that Beinart could have emphasized more forcefully is the gap between the demand for peacekeepers worldwide and the financial resources available to the United Nations to oversee their deployment. The Department of Peace Keeping Operations is forced to maintain the current level of peacekeepers around the world and prepare for new missions without ever experiencing an increase in its budget commensurate to the new operations the Security Council authorizes.

Complicating matters is that the single largest financial donor to peacekeeping operations, the United States, is constantly in arrears. The United States has agreed to pay 27% of the costs of peacekeepers around the globe, but it never makes that amount in full. For FY 2007, it is estimated that the United States will be close to $400 million in arrears.

These backlogs come at a time when the United States is increasingly looking to peacekeeping operations for world conflict zones. For example, just yesterday Ambassador Bolton raised the prospect of a UN peacekeeping mission in Somalia. People can debate the merits of sending blue helmets to Somalia (for the record, the prominent NGO The International Crisis Group cautions against this approach) but if peacekeepers for Somalia are approved, this would be the fourth mission the Security Council will have authorized since August. The Security Council already approved missions for Lebanon, Darfur, and East Timor, which if implemented in full would increase the number of blue helmets across the globe by 50%.

Financially supporting in full peacekeeping operations is critical. It is the only way that major powers, the United States included, can maximize the UN's share of the burden of maintaining peace and security throughout the globe.

In the course of a two and a half hour press conference, Sudanese President Omar al Bashir rejected UN command of a hybrid AU-UN force for Darfur, saying he would only accept African Troops under African leadership. Bashir also gave an impossibly low mortality estimate - 9,000 - as the number of people who have died as a result of the conflict in Darfur. These comments could be a serious setback to the quick deployment of an effective peacekeeping force to Darfur.

Peter Gantz of Refugees International astutely dissects the present situation in an essay posted on his organization's website. In the face of Sudanese obstructionism, writes Gantz, the United Nations should remain steadfast to its commitment for an effective force in Darfur. But for that to happen, member states must back up the UN and not allow Sudan to dictate the terms of deployment of a hybrid force.

As Gantz writes, Sudan has the upper hand at the moment. And their diplomatic tactics may be aimed at making sure that a force for Darfur remains weak. This kind of obstructionism can only be overcome through the concerted efforts of member states concerned for the safety and stability of the region.

"U.N. peacekeepers in Congo on Monday blocked an advance against an eastern city by soldiers loyal to a renegade general as the Supreme Court prepared to deliver its verdict on a contested presidential election result.

Indian troops, part of the world's biggest U.N. peacekeeping force deployed in Democratic Republic of Congo, went into action against soldiers loyal to dissident General Laurent Nkunda who moved towards the provincial capital Goma, an officer said." More

Yesterday, Andrew Natsios and Jean-Marie Guehenno told an audience at the Brookings Institution that the next six weeks were period of crucial importance to Darfur. Their remarks came three days after Sudanese representatives to peace talks held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia agreed in principle to a hybrid United Nations-African Union force for Darfur, but said they needed time to consult with their leaders in Khartoum.

Echoing the sentiments of Natsios and Geuhenno, Kofi Annan said the agreement in Addis Ababa could be a "turning point." Speaking to reporters in Geneva today, Annan also said that he expects a response from Khartoum "today, or latest tomorrow." Meanwhile, Sudan has expelled one of the largest aid organizations in South Darfur, the Norwegian Refugee Council, accusing it of "espionage."

The situation is quite clearly fragile. This could be a moment of considerable progress for international efforts to bring human rights and rule of law to Darfur, or it could presage the total collapse of humanitarian operations in Darfur - a consequence of which Jan Egeland has said could result in as many as 100,000 deaths per month. How Khartoum responds to the Secretary General will give us a good indication of which track we can expect.

This morning, Presidential Special Envoy to Sudan Andrew Natsios and Under-Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations Jean-Marie Guehenno spoke at a Brookings Institution forum on the next steps for Darfur. Their remarks come at a critical time. Late last week, the Sudanese government and representatives of major international actors including the United Nations, the African Union, China, and the United States met in Addis Ababa to discuss the possibility of a hybrid UN-AU force for Darfur.

The speakers' comments were at once hopeful and distressing; hopeful because both officials saw progress in Addis Ababa, but distressing because of a rapidly closing six week time period in which to seize on this apparent progress.

According to Natsios and Geuhenno, during the Addis Ababa negotiations last week the government of Sudan signaled that they agreed in principal to the hybrid AU-UN force proposed by the Secretary General and endorsed by the Security Council in Resolution 1706. As envisioned by 1706, the hybrid force would essentially be a joint AU-UN force that would support the political side of the peace process and offer more robust civilian protection than the AU is capable of doing on its own. It may also be a prelude to a full UN force called for by the same resolution.

Khartoum's apparent willingness to consent to the hybrid force is a positive step, and according to Guehenno may portend a shift in Khartoum's strategic thinking about the crisis in Darfur. For his part, Natsios offered praise for the Secretary General, "whose leadership really showed." Natsios also complimented the Chinese for intervening at key moments and helping to keep the discussion positive.

However, as Geuhenno and Natsios repeated throughout the conference, the diplomatic window to sustain this progress is closing. On January first, the mandate of the 7,000 African Union troops in Darfur is set to expire. (Next week, the African Union will have a critical meeting do decide next steps for the force.) Also on January first, Ban Ki-moon becomes the new Secretary General. This will usher a transitional phase that may present challenges to UN operations throughout the world, including Darfur. Because of both these looming deadlines, Geuhenno and Natsios insisted that these next six weeks are of urgent importance and that Khartoum must take concrete steps toward making the hybid force a reality in Darfur.

We will know in six weeks if promises made in Addis Ababa were sincere. For the sake of non-combatants in Darfur, I certainly hope so.

"The Sudanese government on Thursday agreed in principle to allow a joint United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force into the war-stricken Darfur region, reversing its longstanding refusal to let United Nations troops in.

The agreement, reached after a day of talks with United Nations officials in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopian capital, raised hopes for a more effective peacekeeping effort in Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have been killed in brutal ethnic and tribal warfare since 2003. A small African Union peacekeeping force has been unable to quell the violence." More

BBC: "A package of measures, including an enhanced peacekeeping force, aimed at solving the Darfur crisis are to be discussed at UN-led talks in Ethiopia.

Plans for a hybrid African Union (AU)-UN force are among proposals being considered after Sudan refused to allow a UN force to replace AU troops there."

"Two Jordanian UN peacekeepers have been shot dead in the Haitian capital, Port-au-Prince, UN officials say. The soldiers are reported to have come under attack near Cite Soleil, a slum where armed street gangs are based." More

Despite its proximity to American shores, the conflict and UN peacekeeping operation in Haiti receives little media attention in the American press. Seldom is the question asked: "Could the United States be doing more in Haiti?"

However, despite being buffered from Haiti by the United States, the same cannot be said for the Canadian press. Sunday's Toronto Star asks that very question and features a series of in-depth articles that probe the wisdom of Canada's relatively sparse contributions to the United Nations force established to help local authorities battle urban gangs and put the impoverished nation back on its feat. The force, known in the French acronym as MINUSTAH, used to have a significant number of Canadian troops. But these troops have since redeployed elsewhere. Now, the only Canadians in MINUSTAH are a small contingent of civilian police advisors known as UNPOL.

UNPOL is operating 30% below capacity in Haiti, yet the country remains plagued by urban crime and vigilantism. This has caused some officials interviewed for the Star article to call for more Canadian personnel and troop contributions to MINUSTAH:

"Carlo Dade, an analyst with the Canadian Association of the Americas, known by its French acronym FOCAL, has just returned from Haiti. He says he believes there is a lack of urgency at the RCMP to get officers down to the country and he believes Canada has underestimated the task at hand...'A problem in Haiti is going to show up in Montreal.'"

What is true for Montreal is also true for Miami, Boston, and many other cities with large diaspora communities. Haiti is just miles from the U.S. shores. And with American and Canadian troops extended elsewhere overseas, Ottawa and Washington have effectively outsourced the stabilization of their neighbor to the United Nations. In the long run, the price that North America would have to pay should Haiti experience a total collapse makes MINUSTAH a bargain.

Yesterday the Carter Center announced that the run-off Presidential election held on October 29, 2006, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was "extremely orderly and peaceful" and "very well executed." This is a remarkable piece of good news for the inhabitants of this war torn country and those of the entire region, which has been destabilized for more than a decade due to almost non-stop cross-border clashes. And it is an example of one of the myriad ways in which the United Nations is fostering peace and prosperity around the world.

The run-off on Monday was the third successful election held this year in the Congo, which had not, prior to July, had a free election in over 46 years and has been embroiled for over a decade in a conflict that may have killed up to 4 million people. While there have been a number of factors that have made these elections possible, there can be no question that the United Nations played a central role. The Congolese have received massive amounts of support from the UN's peacekeeping mission in the DRC (MONUC) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).

MONUC and UNDP have helped register 26 million Congolese to vote at 9,000 registration sites. Voter registration kits were distributed to every village by light aircraft, by truck, by canoe, and by hand to overcome infrastructural difficulties in this massive country. Despite being the size of Western Europe, the Congo has only 300 miles of paved roads. And, it has one of the absolute lowest per capita GDPs in the world.

The UNDP Electoral Assistance Program undertook a widespread civic education program, which included plays, musical performances, classes, and films, to educate the 23rd largest electorate in the world, which is predominately illiterate and had never participated in an election. UNDP also delivered over 30 million ballots and other technical equipment to over 50,000 polling stations.

There is no doubt that the road to lasting peace in this complex nation is long and uncertain. But the Carter Center's stamp of approval certainly bodes well for the possibility of forward movement and makes a strong argument for the power of the UN as a stabilizing factor in some of the world's most hostile and complicated situations.

"While acknowledging that progress has been made over the past two years in reducing foreign influence in Lebanon, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Monday that disarming Hizbollah is a "key element" in ensuring a permanent end to hostilities, and warned that much remains to be done to restore stability and peace." More

U.N. peacekeeping has surged to 93,000 troops, police and civilian personnel in 18 operations around the world, the most ever in the history of the world body, a U.N. official said on Wednesday.

But this figure, which includes nearly 70,000 military personnel, could jump to 140,000 within a year, Jean-Marie Guehenno, the undersecretary-general for peacekeeping, told a news conference.

For example, the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, now at 3,437, is authorized for up to 11,596 personnel and another 1,054 troops and 1,608 civilians are scheduled to go to Timor.

And if the Khartoum government ever gives its consent, the U.N. Security Council has authorized 17,300 troops, 5,300 police and 4,860 civilians to help stop atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region. More

United Nations peacekeepers deployed in southern Lebanon to act as a buffer between Israel and Hezbollah fighters are authorized to use force to stop "hostile activity" of any kind, the UN said. More

Jane Holl Lute: "Not many people know this, but the United Nations' peacekeeping force represents the world's second largest deployed military operational presence in the world.

In August, the Security Council voted to create three important and large new peacekeeping missions -- in Lebanon, Timor-Leste and Darfur. But these are only the most recent examples of the world's increasing reliance on UN