Tag Archives: protection

What you don’t understand about UN Peacekeepers

Leave a reply

There is SO much misunderstanding about what the term United Nations Peacekeepers means, and what members of such a deployment can do – and cannot do. And I admit that, before 2001, I didn’t really know what it meant either.

Here are four facts about United Nations Peacekeepers that I wish everyone understood, and that I wish journalists did a much better job of explaining whenever they write about UN Peacekeeping operations:

(1) There is no standing military of UN Peacekeepers. When you hear the term UN Peacekeepers, it means men and women who are members of their respective country’s armed forces and are still entirely under the command of their own country’s military leadership. When you hear the term “a group of UN Peacekeepers”, it means a group of, say, army infantry from Nigeria, or the or India, or Belgium, or any number of other countries that may be participating. There is NO United Nations “army”. A person can’t sign up somewhere to be a UN peacekeeper – you would have to join your own country’s military or police and hope that, somehow, your country will choose to donate your unit to a peacekeeping operation.

(2) 125 countries contribute military troops, police, and civilian personnel to UN Peacekeeping operations, including 126 peacekeepers from the USA. Pakistan, India and Bangladesh are among the largest individual contributors with around 8,000 units each. African nations contributed nearly half the total, almost 44,000 units.

(3) UN peacekeeping operations are deployed on the basis of mandates from the United Nations Security Council – and that mandate must be unanimous. If one of the permanent members of the Security Council – China, Russia, the USA, France or the UK – says “no” to a deployment in a country, even if they host country wants such, then there will be no UN peacekeeping operations in that country.

(4) UN peacekeeping operations cannot happen without permission of the country where they will be deployed. That host country must invite them, approve of their being there and approve the definition of what they do. Peacekeeping missions need the consent of the host governments to operate, cannot do anything beyond what their host country has agreed they can do, and can be ordered to leave by that host country at any moment. That means that, very often, those in command of UN peacekeeping forces will refuse to undertake a life-saving action protecting foreign refugees, an ethnic minority or even local women, because such actions might upset the host country. For instance, in 2016, local and foreign aid workers were raped, beaten and robbed in South Sudan, by South Sudanese government troops, just minutes away from the main UN compound in Juba, the capital. Despite desperate phone and text messages from the victims to those in command at that compound, the 2,000 or so troops never stirred. Most articles, including this one from CNN, never identify what country those peacekeepers represent, giving the false impression that these troops are under the command of the UN. The troops that ignored the pleas from aid workers in Sudan were, in fact, from China, India, Ethiopia and Nepal. Belgian troops, acting as UN Peacekeepers, stood by Tutsi people were slaughtered in Rwanda in 1994, and a year later, Dutch troops failed to stop the massacre of 8,000 Muslim men by Serbs in Srebrenica, a supposedly UN “safe area.” It is up to those individual countries to discipline their troops stationed in these countries for not fulfilling their duties, and only IF it can be proven they did not do what they were explicitly mandated to do – all the UN can do is strongly urge them to do so.

This blog also cites statistics from the official UN Peacekeeping website, from the UN Foundation blog 7 key facts UN peacekeeping, and from this article in the Guardian.

Should the UN Peacekeeping system be changed? That’s someone else’s blog to write… I just want who the peacekeepers are and what they can and cannot do to be better clarified, by journalists in particular.

Also see:

United Nations personnel system needs radical overhaul

International aid workers having sex with people in countries in crisis

Frank description of what it’s like to work in communications in the UN

UN Agencies: Defend your “internships”

UN Volunteers, IFRC, ILO & others make HUGE misstep

My work in international development (including the United Nations)

International aid workers having sex with people in countries in crisis

3 Replies

I’ve written about the danger of sexual assault for women that work in aid and development, including PeaceCorps members (see the end of this blog for links). But, as I’ve researched, written and published these pieces, I’ve thought about women living in those developing countries, and how those local women are at even greater risk of sexual assault by the foreigners coming to their communities, either military, private enterprise or humanitarian workers. They are at MUCH greater risk, in fact. The Oxfam scandal reminds me that I’m overdue to focus on this.

If case you aren’t aware: earlier in February, The London Times reported that the U.K.-based agency Oxfam covered up an internal inquiry finding that the country director for the African country of Chad, Roland van Hauwermeiren, and members of his staff, had paid prostitutes in Chad for sex. Similar accusations emerged after van Hauwermeiren and his team were reassigned to Haiti following the devastating 2010 earthquake there. In an open letter responding to the allegations, van Hauwemeiren, a 68-year-old Dutch citizen, denied the allegations of sexual exploitation, saying he had “intimate relations” with a woman in Haiti during his tenure there, but that she was “not a prostitute. I never gave her money.”

Can local women in a developing country that has been devastated by war, corruption, natural disaster and/or poverty have consensual sex with foreign military members, business people or aid workers? Can a refugee? I say no. It’s impossible for someone in such a vulnerable position economically or socially to freely consent to sex with someone with that much power. 

About 20 years ago, there was an online community called the Aid Workers Network. I was one of the facilitators of that network, and we had some really incredible discussions about working in aid and development. It was through that network that I read an article about a humanitarian worker seeing his boss leaving a brothel, and it was the first time I had ever considered issues around aid workers and sex with local people – or even six with each other.

I’ve worked with international aid agencies since 2001, including in some developing countries, and in my briefings for working in those countries and with local people, people who are in highly-vulnerable positions because of their dire economic situation and because of the insecurity of their situation, I never once heard a caution about sexual relationships with local people, about power dynamics that many would say render it impossible to call a sexual relationship with a local woman and a foreign man “consensual.”

Sara Callaway, co-founder of Women of Colour Global Women’s Strike, noted in this article in The Guardian: “When women are starving and living in rubble, it is not prostitution. It is rape – what choice do women have?”

Other than on the now-defunct Aid Workers Network, I never once witnessed this as a topic of discussion among aid workers, including at the United Nations. I never felt that I was in a position of stability in terms of my job to dare to ask questions of human resources managers or anyone else, for that matter, regarding being on guard regarding sexual exploitation of local people by aid staff. I now so regret not asking the questions I wanted to, even if it would have jeopardized my career at the UN.

Here’s what I think needs to happen to keep local women safe and to change the culture at oh-so-many field offices regarding the safety of local women in their interactions with international staff:

  • Aid agencies MUST have written policies regarding international staff engaging in romantic or sexual relationships with local people or international staff that are subordinate to them, and these policies should be communicated when a person is hired and re-iterated regularly to ensure that no one can say, “Oh, I didn’t know!”
  • Visiting a prostitute in a developing country for sex, rather than as a part of official work with sex workers to ensure their basic rights, protect their health, etc., should be grounds for dismissal of international staff, as a violation of that agency’s written code of conduct. It should not matter if money was exchanged or not. Aid agencies cannot say they worry about the rights of women and then ignore that staff are visiting prostitutes for sex in developing countries. They must also consider what their policy will be regarding local male staff and their interactions with sex workers – this isn’t just about appropriateness; it’s also about abuse of power.
  • Aid agencies should publicly report how many accounts of sexual misconduct they investigate each year, the number of people dismissed each year for sexual harassment or abuse, and the processes they have for investigating and dealing with reports of sexual harassment or abuse. No need for names of people nor even of the countries where incidents happen – naming the countries where such happens could, in fact, endanger humanitarian workers in those countries.
  • Aid agencies should also say, in writing, publicly, if they are willing to rehire or reassign a staff member or contractor they suspect to have violated their policies regarding sexual misconduct or abuse, and what their policy is for providing a reference to such staff people regarding jobs at other agencies.

Oh, but what if an international aid worker truly falls in love with a local person? Then the aid worker can quit their job, get out of that power position, and get on a more level playing field with the love of their life.

There has never been a greater need for aid agencies. There has never been a greater need for foreign money to support those aid agencies. Aid agencies have prevented wars – no, not all of them, obviously. Aid agencies prevent genocides – no, not all of them, obviously. But without aid agencies, the amount of chaos happening in the world would be untenable. Aid agency scandals provide perfect scenarios for isolationists in government to cut foreign aid even further. Humanity, nor the environment, can survive without aid agencies – and they cannot survive if they do not address this very real, serious issue.

Related blogs:

Don’t know Linda Graff? You’re in trouble!

1 Reply

Linda Graff is a volunteer management trainer, with a specialization regarding risk management in engaging volunteers.

Linda is retiring, and Andy Fryer has done an interview with her that talks about her incredible contributions to our knowledge about effective volunteer engagement. It’s worth your time to read the interview.

Readers are invited to comment, and my comment says, in part:

I can’t count how many times I have run to my risk management books by Linda to be able to make a point or even win an argument – and I pretty much dismiss any volunteer management expert who doesn’t have one of her books on the shelf or doesn’t seem to know who she is (blasphemy!).

Every nonprofit organization/mission-based organization needs at least one Linda Graff book on the bookshelf – and staff need to consult such regularly. My recommendation is Beyond Police Checks. It’s North America-specific, but the advice is applicable to any country.

It’s a loss for our sector that Linda is retiring, but I know that she now gets to spend much more time fishing, and that makes me happy.