SOLLIMS Sampler Volume 10, Issue 1 - Page 16

patrolled the ZOS to prevent violations, and worked to restore security and maintain public order throughout their designated areas of operations. Just as IFOR was legitimized through agreement of the warring factions in the Dayton Peace Accords, so was the International Police Task Force (IPTF). Annex 11 of the Accords stated that responsibility for maintaining a safe and secure environment for all persons rests with the signatories themselves; however, to assist in discharging their public security obligations, the parties request that the IPTF be created and that it perform the following functions:     Monitor and inspect judicial and law enforcement activities, including conducting joint patrols with local police forces. Advise and train law enforcement personnel. Analyze the public security threat and offer advice to government authorities on how to organize their police forces most effectively. Facilitate law enforcement improvement and respond to the requests of the parties, to the extent possible. Throughout IFOR’s operations aimed at maintaining a safe and secure environment, the IPTF was focused on monitoring local police and judicial authorities for compliance with internationally accepted standards and checking whether they were properly treating/ protecting all citizens (especially minorities / members of other ethnic groups). Additionally, the IPTF provided support to ensure public safety for the September 1996 national elections. Of note, the IPTF was not placed within the IFOR organizational structure or under its control. Instead, it fell under the United Nations Mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina (UNMBIH). Unfortunately, however, UNNMBIH was not adequately staffed or prepared to provide the logistical support needed by the IPTF. The IPTF continuously confronted problems and delays attempting to gain requisite resources and support. Another major issue was that host nation/local police officers continued to abuse ethnic minorities in their areas in spite of language in the Dayton Peace Accords. Compounding this issue, certain municipal police chiefs were notoriously corrupt and enmeshed in networks of illicit activity – along with certain political leaders/sponsors. Fortunately, the IPTF was able to call upon IFOR to back them up when they needed help with certain law enforcement or detention problems. This IPTF-IFOR coordination and responsiveness proved to be a suitable mechanism for dealing with unlawful activities – roadblocks, weapons caches, illegal detentions of people of ethnic minorities, etc. – periodically instigated and/or conducted by prejudicial local officials, local police, and supporters. Certain IFOR assistance, principally in the form of Civil Affairs personnel (especially those with police specialties), was invaluable in establishing an initial operational capability for the IPTF and reducing resource gaps. Their role was especially crucial in planning the pivotal transfer of six Sarajevo suburbs to Moslem control and in organizing the IPTF’s limited resources to oversee each of the transfers. Once the IPTF had become fully operational, Civil Affairs personnel provided liaison between the IPTF and IFOR, ensuring that opera- tional information was exchanged daily between the two entities. Especially vital was the involvement of IFOR Civil Affairs personnel in the establishment of the IPTF’s Command Center – including the overall design, the standard operating procedures, and development of a communications net that linked IPTF Headquarters to its out-stations and to IFOR. Table of Contents | Quick Look | Contact PKSOI Page 15 of 36