Peacekeeping info needed

[RorerQuaalude]

Hi all. Alright, this semester I've opted to take a Strategic Studies class, which essentially deals with foreign policies of war, arms control and the like. One topic of the course is Peacekeeping. During a class discussion, most of the members of the class had highly convoluted perceptions of peacekeeping and our military as a whole. I want to avoid using the term 'Hippies' and 'Overly-Left Wing' to describe the commenters. Essentially, the majority of the class thought that peacekeeping is both ineffective and needless, and that the nation isn't doing 'enough'. There was also quite a bit of CF-bashing involved too. Furthermore there was a defined case of 'America good! Canada lazy!'. Needless to say, I took offense to their uneducated and misinformed tirades. Because I've yet to go on a peacekeeping mission (I've yet to finish BMOQ and the like) I didn't necessarily feel qualified enough to make a good comment to put the lefties in their place. So, I'm basically asking anyone who's served on peacekeeping missions what it's all about, and what the real reality of peacekeeping is. I really want to show these people the reality. The  perceptions of the individuals in my class are clearly wrong and at least need some constructive criticism. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Horse_Soldier]

Something does not compute: "America good" said by lefties???  ???

On the macro scale, Canada maybe has not been "lazy", but our politicians have been shirking their international responsibilities - to use that old cliché, they're like the diner who heads for the bathroom when the collective bill is presented.  The liberals have been a lot of talk on the international scene, especially Paul Martin, and not much action - so it could be conceived of as being "lazy".  As for peacekeeping being ineffective and needless, take a look at today's world.  Traditional "peacekeeping" à la United Nations has failed repeatedly in the last decade or so.  Peacemaking (by force of arms) is the new norm.  I'll let those who have actually been on a UN tour talk about their experiences, but your classmates seem to have a bit more of a grasp of the reality out there than you give them credit for.

And no, Canada isn't doing nearly "enough" on this planet for all our wealth (including those stunning "unforeseen" budget surpluses) - because our dear politicians have systematically stripped this great country of ours of the tools to "do" in the world.  Read Andrew Cohen's book While Canada Slept: How We Lost Our Place in the World.  It's a real eye opener http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/item.asp?Item=978077102275&Catalog=Books&N=35&Lang=en&Section=books&zxac=1

 

[RorerQuaalude]

Yea it confused me too that what appear to be lefties were basically saying that the US is doing more good in terms of peacekeeping. Iraq is a whole different matter, however. University students are strange like that . But what I failed to mention in my previous post is that the majority of my classmates seemed to use the same arguement repeatedly concerning Canada's peacekeeping success: The Airborne Incident, which for some reason gives them the impression that the Forces as a whole act like that, and thus sours their impression of peacekeeping.

 

[mseoptrucker]

      where has the states interveaned when it wasen't for their best intrests without international pressure? What war have they stoped from happening? Canada has contributed to world peace more so then any other nation and if not by our fellow Canadians we are well respected through out the rest of the world. If America good Canada bad tell them to travell abrod with an american flag on their jackets. The americans are wearing Canadian flags.

 

[pbi]

The old "Pearsonian" idea of peacekeeping: a few lightly armed blue helmets with a weak mandate and no robust rules of engagement, is thankfully, sliding into the garbage can of history where IMHO it belongs. It only took the UN (and the world) a mere two or three genocidal massacres to realize that if you want to stop bad guys, send badder guys and lots of them, and back them up. Far too many UN "peacekeeping" missions were farces with little or no real capability.

IMHO it is far, far more likely that what actually kept the peace between warring parties in many of these situations was never a few UN blue helmets scattered about in tiny OPs with no combat power: instead it was more likely the pressure exerted on the belligerents by larger powers or due to internal issues: ie: they couldn't sustain the fighting for political or economic reasons. Or, as in the case of IFOR and KFOR, a powerful enough US-backed NATO force was inserted to make the baddies think twice before going at each other. Where the warring powers really meant to go at it, they just kicked the UN out of the way and went at it: Angola in 92, Somalia in 93, Croatia in 95, Rwanda are all good examples of how little the UN can really do against a determined belligerent. (Especially one with external supports such as the Croats enjoyed...)

The reason, IMHO, that your classmates (along with many Canadians) are so confused about the whole thing is the CF and the Govt for so long flogged the "Happy Blue Peacekeeper Guy" image to the public, in a desperate search for acceptance and legitimacy while denying the actual purpose of an armed force: to apply lethal force (or the credible threat of it) in pursuit of the aims of the state. Look at this ridiculous practice of our media (and, I'm sorry to say, some people in the military...) of calling soldiers "peacekeepers" as a matter of course. What this results in is naive shock and horror when those "peacekeepers" turn out to be "soldiers" who kill other people or get killed themselves.

If you want help dealing with the people in your class, you are in luck: through this site you have access to tons of info and good opinions that I'm sure we would be willing to share with you, that should put those numpties to flight. Cheers.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Rorer,

PBI definately summed up the whole "peacekeeping" misconception that exists outside (and inside) the military.  The subtleties between the various levels of conflict are often lost on civilians but students in a Conflict Management course should be able to deal with it.

I went to a civilian univsersity while I was in the Reserves and I to had to deal with listening to comments regarding the CF (some from students, some from professors).  I found that the "soft sell" method worked quite well.  Put forth a positive image of the CF in yourself and give them an education in the realities of what the CF has done over the last ten or so years.  We've had people in a host of bad spots across the world and usually with little recognition.  Soldiers have been killed, wounded and borne witness to atrocities and until quite recently did so in relative silence while most of Canada lived in blissful ignorance.  I think that this part is improving and I hope that this continues. 

:warstory:  Canadian soldiers have shown tremendous professionalism dealing with other cultures in wartorn areas.  I have not been on a peacekeeping mission but I did deploy to Kabul as part of Op ATHENA from Aug 03 to Feb 04.  We were not acting as peacekeepers keeping two belligerents apart but were rather we were there to support the Transitional Authority and ensure stability.  When I first arrived many locals had no idea what Canada was (except the odd one who had family here).  Many that I spoke to thought that we were Americans or Brits.  After a couple of months most people would wave and smile at us (and I felt that it was genuine) and some even shouted "Canada Good!" (I should admit that there were many soldiers with much more local contact than me and they may refute me here).  This goodwill was the result of our soldier's actions and not due to handouts or charity.  As an example we had many incidents where kids pointed guns at us (some obviously toys, others not) but our troops demonstrated restraint.  Many soldiers picked up some of the local language and made steps to be able to greet the locals.  Our troops respected local customs when outside of the camp (such as not eating or smoking openly during Ramadan).  Other agencies were happy to have us support them as they knew the quality of our soldiers.

Perhaps you should emphasize with your fellow students that the CF will carry out such missions and tasks as it is given to a very high standard as long as it gets the resources and support required.  We do not pick our missions and we only get such resources as we are given.  If your fellow students want Canada to be more involved (as them for specfics) then tell them that Canada must make the requisite investment in people and treasure.  We have our problems and issues but I think that we have come a long way since the mid 90's when every newscast had negative items on the CF.  If you can somewhow get them to think outside of the "peacekeeping" box based on the points raised by the people above you will have won a victory! 

I'll stop preaching to choir now, sorry.

Cheers,

2B