X hits on this document





8 / 12

work back to NEPAD, announcing that it "will constitute an important contribution to one of the key priorities of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) – peace and security in Africa."23 The European Union further explained that that the facility

is based on the principle of African ownership. The Peace Facility will support African led peacekeeping operations in Africa as well as capacity building for the emerging security structure of the African Union. The Peace Facility will not finance European peacekeeping operations. Peacekeeping operations financed under the Peace Facility will be initiated and implemented by the African Union and/or sub-regional African organisations. The African Union will play a central role in the decision making concerning peace keeping operations under the Peace Facility. 24

It is fair to note that even with a much greater capacity to conduct peace operations than either the African Union or ECOWAS, the UN faces a struggle in deploying its missions rapidly and effectively into the field; in matching mandates to missions; in recruiting skilled peacekeepers; in planning, managing, overseeing and deploying operations effectively; and in linking logistical and enabling support with troop contributing countries.

Complex operations pose major challenges, especially in the nexus between peacebuilding and peacekeeping. Funding for well-known and popular UN programs in this realm can still face funding questions, for example. Disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) programs are widely recognized as needed. Yet the UN primarily funds these programs through voluntary contributions from Member States, rather than through the UN mission budgets for peace operations, which would integrate it directly in the planning for the mission and guarantee initial funding. The “Brahimi Report”25 recommended that DDR funding be included in the start-up phase of a mission’s budget; the UN mission budget for Liberia did include it but remains controversial due to concerns (such as from the United States) that “reintegration” is most appropriately funded with development monies. This and other challenges face the better-equipped and better-staffed UN Secretariat offices – and demonstrate what is involved with operationalizing the ambitions for a stronger African capacity.

Bilateral Support: Training Centers and Programs. One of the strongest areas of existing support to African-led efforts for peace operations is in training.26 G8 nations (and others) have provided direct support both to peacekeeping training centers in Africa as well as bilateral assistance and training programs to African militaries and civilians for peace operations. With much fanfare, the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Center opened in Ghana in January 2004 with German Chancellor Schroeder at its inauguration. Germany provided direct aid, as did other G8 countries – Canada, Italy, France, the United Kingdom, and the USA – among other Western countries. Africa is the home to various peacekeeping training centers, such as those in Nigeria, Mali, Kenya and Zimbabwe, as well as other institutes that support civilian and military training. Many of these sites receive support from G8 countries as well. ACCORD and Institute for Security Studies (ISS) in South Africa have worked with the Norwegian government to host civilian training for peace-building, for example.

23 24 Ibid, Reuters (reported in UN Wire), 31 March 2004. “European Commission Welcomes Member States Approval of the European Commission’s for a Euro 250 Million African Peace Facility,” European Commission, 31 March 2004. See http://www.euireland.ie/news/development/0304/africanpeacefacility.htm

25 The Brahimi Report is the informal name given to the August 2000 report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations, which was chaired by UN Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi.

26 For a fuller review of compliance with G8 commitments to support training of African forces and civilians and better coordinate peacekeeping training initiatives, see “2002 Final Kananaskis Compliance Report,” May 2003, G8 Research Group, University of Toronto G8 Research Group (Toronto, Canada); pages 44-54.


Document info
Document views42
Page views42
Page last viewedThu Dec 22 01:27:21 UTC 2016