An image circumnavigating the internet depicts a chicken
fleeing for its life from a rampaging tiger. Forced to choose,
most would prefer to be the tiger, although in some instances
we might identify more closely with the chicken. Metaphorical-
ly, when the United Nations elects to establish a peacekeeping
mission in a fragile state, one would hope that the tiger would
symbolize the collective weight of the international community
and be up to the challenge. Too often, though, the most that
can be said is that—bad as things might be with a peacekeeping
mission present—things would be far worse if the mission were
absent. Like the bird in the picture, peacekeeping missions are
typically overwhelmed by their complex environments, rather
than the other way around.
There have been many notable calls for improvement in UN
peacekeeping. The most significant of these are the Brahimi
Report, the New Horizons for Peacekeeping, and three more
recent efforts: the High Level Independent Panel for Peace
Operations (HIPPO) report, the Cruz Report, and the Sec-
retariat’s current Action for Peacekeeping initiative (A4P).
These studies have advocated improvement in numerous areas
including mandates, bureaucratic efficiency, training, doctrine,
the protection of civilians, leadership, technology, and conduct
(especially related to sexual exploitation and abuse—SEA).
The HIPPO report called for four essential shifts:
• Politics must drive design and implementation of peace
operations.
• The full spectrum of UN peace operations must be used
more flexibly to respond to changing needs on the ground.
• Stronger, more inclusive peace and security partnerships
are needed.
• The UN Secretariat must become more field-focused, and
UN peace operations must be more people-centered.
The recent Cruz Report argued that military components
should be more assertive, because passivity only encourages
spoilers to act against the UN mission. This observation applies
both to the protection of UN assets, which are increasingly tar-
geted, as well as to the protection of civilians. The Cruz Report
advocated for many specific recommendations such as the de-
centralization of casualty evacuation and medical evacuation to
give field commanders more control and make these procedures
more responsive. The Secretary General’s A4P initiative was
launched on 28 March 2018 and is an emerging set of collec-
tive measures organized around the “four Ps” (people, politics,
partnerships, and performance). While the initiative is still
under development, it includes topics such as enhancing safety,
security, performance and leadership; conduct, discipline, and
human rights; and reviewing the state of UN missions.
Whether peacekeeping is an appropriate tool in today’s conflict
zones is a legitimate topic for debate. Contemporary missions
often straddle the gray area between peacekeeping and other
types of peace operations, especially “peace enforcement” and
“peacebuilding.” “Robust peacekeeping” generally applies to
situations where a peacekeeping mission is likely to confront lo-
cal armed combatants for self-protection or to protect civilians.
UN peacekeeping missions increasingly include in their titles
the terms “multidimensional” (military, civilian, and police
components with more than a simple peacekeeping mandate),
“integrated” (some formal connection, however limited, be-
tween the UN mission and the UN country team of human-
itarian and development organizations) and “stabilization” (a
generally vague term subject to interpretation ).
37