Peace Operations An Australian Perspective MILITARY SUPPORT OPERATIONS As a member state of the UN, Australia endeavours to pursue international cooperation in keeping with the UN Charter. The Charter prescribes to solve international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Australia supports the activities of the UN and is an active member of the General Assembly and other UN bodies. In keeping with this support, the Australian Defence Force (ADF) has frequently been called upon to assist UN sponsored and other multinational (combined) peace operations. It is highly likely that any type of peace operation, unilateral, combined, coalition or regional, would be established under the legitimacy of the UN Charter. Peace operations aid diplomatic efforts to resolve potential or actual conflict as well as, increasingly, to provide a framework for humanitarian relief operations. A wide range of peace operations have been established and the nature of many of them has been beyond the scope of traditional peacekeeping. Military force may be employed to aid peace building, peacemaking, preventive diplomacy, and peacekeeping or peace enforcement initiatives. The ADF divides peace operations into: Peace building - is a set of strategies, which aim to ensure that disputes, armed conflicts, and other major crises do not arise in the first placeor if they do arise that they do not subsequently recur.
Preventive diplomacy - is diplomatic action to prevent disputes from developing between parties, to prevent existing disputes from escalating into conflict and to limit the expansion of conflicts when they occur. Peacemaking - is diplomatic action to bring hostile parties to a negotiated agreement through such peaceful means as those foreseen under chapter VI of the UN Charter. Peacekeeping - is a non-coercive instrument of diplomacy, where a legitimate, international civil and/or military coalition is employed with the consent of the belligerent parties, in an impartial, non-combatant manner, to implement conflict prevention and/or resolution arrangements or assist humanitarian aid operations. Peace enforcement - is the coercive use of civil and military sanctions and collective security actions, by legitimate, international intervention forces, to assist diplomatic efforts to prevent armed conflict from starting, escalating or spreading or to restore peace between belligerents , who may not consent to that intervention. Peace enforcement operations differ from war. In war, the ultimate military aim is to defeat a designated enemy force. In peace enforcement operations, the military aim will normally be to coerce the belligerent(s) or potential belligerent(s) into avoiding or ceasing armed conflict and participating in peaceful settlement of disputes. The complex nature of these multi-dimensional operations also requires specific approach or philosophy, supported by appropriate doctrine, although it should be noted that peace operations are nothing more than another form of combined military operation, albeit with particular principles and considerations. AUSTRALIAN PARTICIPATION CRITERIA Political consideration Australian participation in peace operations is decided on a case-by-case basis, with a range of policy considerations influencing the Governments decision. Criteria applied in evaluating Australian participation include:
While the principles of war remain applicable to a greater or lesser degree, there are additional, specific principles for the conduct of peace operations. Commanders and all members of a peace force must be aware of these principles so that their actions do not unwittingly or unknowingly escalate the operation from one of peacekeeping to one of peace enforcement.
The ADF applies different weighting to the principles in planning for the range of peace operations. For example, consent is not a requirement for a peace enforcement operation, but is essential for a peacekeeping mission. Peace operations is a broad term used to encompass all types of military operations designed to assist a diplomatic peace process. Within the ADF doctrinal framework, peace operations are included as part of military support operations (MSO). As well as the more 'traditional' tasks, such as monitoring ceasefire and reporting breaches of agreements, military capability is called upon to support such activities as:
Increasingly, peace operations involve complex multi-dimensional tasks comprising, among others, political, military and humanitarian lines of operation. Their successful conduct requires an understanding not only of the military role, but also the interrelated roles of the diplomatic, electoral, human rights, civil police, and humanitarian components of a mission. SPECIFIC PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Planning for peace operations conforms to procedures for joint and combined planning within the ADF. The following specific considerations are noteworthy:
COMMAND AND CONTROL (C2) ARRANGEMENTS The scope of ADF involvement in the planning of a peace operation will be dictated by the C2 arrangements for the operation. The ADF can be tasked to participate in peace operations under one of four broad C2 arrangements:
Where Australia is not leading the operation, ADF planning is likely to be confined to the deployment phase, policy matters concerned with the status of forces agreement (SOFA), rules of engagement (ROE) and specific AS aspects such as force extraction or rotation. Once deployed, the Australian contingent will operate in accordance with the missions mandate and the appropriate directive. Where Australia is leading the operation, ADF planning will be conducted in accordance with existing ADF planning processes and procedures for all MSO and will not be confined to any one operational phase. Level of ADF commitment. Broadly, there are two levels of ADF commitment, individual and contingents. The planning processes will vary according to the level of commitment by the ADF, but in the most part these differences will be limited to the number of personnel to be committed to the operation only.
Formulation of the mandate and planning for the mission may be conducted in very short time frames with political imperatives dictating structures and actions that would not make sound military sense. This is a particular problem with UN-directed peace operations. Operations will normally be multinational in composition. This can involve operations with contingents from nations that are not traditional allies. Standards of training, doctrine, methods of operation and equipment specification and capability can vary dramatically. Distance from a national support base will often dictate lines of logistic support outside national chains, particularly if the national contribution is a small one. The multi-dimensional nature of peace operations will involve interface with organisations and lines of operation with which members of many contingents will have little familiarity. These include political, humanitarian, human rights, electoral and civilian police components. Unless carefully managed through constant consultation, relations can become strained and overall mission effectiveness can be detrimentally effected. The open access accorded the media in many mission areas increases their influence when compared to the control that can be partially exerted over them in more conventional war-fighting theatres. The media will probably be in the mission area before the peace operations force arrives. Planning must take into account the possibility of utilising the media as a resource in achieving the mission goal(s). The military component in a peace operation will always be part of a wider political effort to avoid, limit or resolve armed conflict. The military capability is primarily used for peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations. The key difference between peacekeeping and peace enforcement lies in the level of consent of the parties to the conflict. This distinction can often be complicated by a force gaining consent at the political, strategic and operational levels but, for various reasons, losing it at the local tactical level. Even in peacekeeping operations the force will retain the right of self-defence. This notion can be robustly applied. In some situations, formal guidelines to Force Commanders have defined self defence as including defence of the mandate itself. A key consideration in the use of force, however, will be the capability of the peace operations force when compared to the task and the capabilities of the belligerents or potential belligerents. A force deployed, structured, trained and equipped to undertake peace enforcement would normally be able to operate in a peacekeeping posture. The reverse is not true. Peace operations tasks will often overlap with other MSO such as humanitarian operations. In some cases, the primary focus of the military element of a peace operation will be facilitation of emergency humanitarian relief. This will normally relate to provision of security and logistics. In exceptional cases, the military may act as a relief provider. This effort must be coordinated with the wider humanitarian and developmental plan for the mission area. Peace operations tasks may also often overlap in a mission area. As can be seen in the above figure, peace building measures, for example, will often continue through all
The stages of a conflict:
MILITARY PEACE OPERATIONS TASKS Within the two broad types of military involvement in peace operations, there are a number of tasks. These include:
While the focus of the military component will be on tasks for which military capability is most suited, durable solutions to armed conflict are non-military in nature. All elements of the force must be proactive in identifying measures that will strengthen the peace process. This will often see the military component identifying peace-building tasks. To be effective these measures must be coordinated. Coordination of peace building, however, is not a military task. Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia 2002 |
