The UN recently held its annual Peacekeeping Ministerial this last December, the first after the 2020 event was canceled due to the pandemic. This year, dozens of foreign and defense ministers met in a crucial forum for organizing international support for UN peacekeeping operations. This article will try to serve as a post-mortem “round-up” of the conference's activities, as well as to analyze the impact the ministerial might have on peacekeeping operations going forward.
UN peacekeeping is increasingly finding itself in a tough position. As Paul Williams of GWU explained in early March 2020, “the Council's three strategic goals for peacekeeping operations: implementing broad mandates, minimizing peacekeeper casualties and maximizing cost-effectiveness—cannot be achieved simultaneously.” Since his writing, the COVID-19 pandemic has only deepened the crisis. National governments are now even less willing to fund peacekeeping operations (PKOs) due to the need for domestic investment. Meanwhile, the pandemic and its economic impacts have intensified levels of conflict worldwide, while simultaneously having increased the number of challenges for peacekeepers on the ground. The UN Department of Peace Operations clearly needs additional support to respond to international conflict, and the Peacekeeping Ministerial offers just the opportunity to do so.
The UN Peacekeeping Ministerial has been held annually since 2014, with the exceptions of 2018 and 2020. While it was initially a meeting at the head of state level, in recent years it has shifted down to the level of foreign and/or defense ministers. The ministerial has emerged as a method for states to coordinate their support to UN peacekeeping operations, as well as to serve as a forum for discussion between member states on key thematic areas relating to peacekeeping. Crucially, the UN Peacekeeping Ministerial is the primary window for states to pledge new units and capabilities to PKOs. It is almost the equivalent of a draft-day or the first day of free agency in American sports: a hectic few days where an organization (in this case the Department of Peace Operations) attempts to significantly boost its capabilities by adding new assets and personnel.
South Korea was the host this year, and as such, they were partially responsible for setting the agenda. They identified two major themes: medical capacity building and technology. It is becoming increasingly clear that there is a medical gap in peacekeeping missions. Even in Mali’s mission, MINUSMA, there are issues with ensuring high levels of care and medical evacuation capabilities. This is despite the fact that Mali is considered one of the most dangerous missions for peacekeepers and thus the need for medical care is highest. Thus, one objective for the ministerial was to receive more pledges for medical units and medical capacity building. The other major theme was technology. Like with medical resources, the UN has identified the implementation of new technology as a key way to improve mission success. Because of this one of the hopes of the ministerial was to secure pledges in high-tech equipment like night vision goggles, C-IED technology, and tactical drones.
In addition to these major themes, there were four online preparatory conferences held by member states before the ministerial proper. The first on peacebuilding and sustaining peace focused on how integrating peacekeeping missions with other UN organizations such as country teams and special political missions. The second on partnerships for performance and accountability focused on how to properly monitor and evaluate peacekeeping missions. The third on capacity-building and training initiatives focused on how the UN could coordinate member states (particularly those with a highly developed military capacity) providing training and other technical supports to Troop Contributing Countries (TCCs) with less developed militaries. The final conference, on the protection of civilians and safety and security, focused on ways to reduce the risk of injury and death to both peacekeepers and civilians within mission areas, such as by increasing mission mobility via additional helicopters.
With those common goals and themes set, representatives from nearly every UN member state arrived in Seoul to determine who would contribute what to help support the public good that UN peacekeeping provides. Now that the preliminary work has been explained and the dust has mostly settled, we can now examine the results of the ministerial by thematic area,
The ministerial was able to make significant headways in the field of medical capacity. Several countries pledged hospitals and other medical units, most notably seven field hospitals from Egypt, Ghana, Italy, Kazakstan, Mongolia, Morocco, and Uganda. In addition, developed militaries, such as Canada, China, and the United States have offered other forms of medical support such as training, equipment, and off-site treatment. Key amongst these is a large number of first aid kits going to African TCCs in MINUSMA, who are currently suffering a disproportionately high casualty rate within a PKO with an already high casualty rate. These pledges represent a significant improvement in the UN's potential medical capacity, especially when combined with pledges of aeromedical evacuation capable helicopters.
This leads us to the second theme of the Ministerial, technology. The Koreans were the host and they made a splash ahead of the conference when they announced a pledge of 16 helicopters in a rare joint pledge with Kenya. South Korea will provide the actual helicopters and some technical personnel, while the bulk of the deployed personnel will hail from Kenya. When combined with pledges from Germany, Italy, Kazakhstan, and Sri Lanka, the at least 25 newly pledged helicopters should increase UN helicopter levels in large-scale missions by 57%. In addition, Italy, Rwanda, and Kazakhstan all pledged unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) units of various sizes. These aircraft pledges are vital: in the DPOs pre-ministerial pledging guide they specifically requested large quantities of UAV and helicopter units, and it appears that those requests have been fulfilled. In terms of other technology-related pledges, France and several other European countries pledged engineering equipment to other TCCs. The large number of aircraft pledged is probably the most important set of pledges coming out of the Ministerial, as their presence will provide much-needed boosts in the critical areas of medical evacuation, logistics, and rapid reaction to some of the UN's most challenging missions.
The ministerial was also notable for the large number of training pledges put in by the developed, Global North militaries. France pledged to train 10,000 African peacekeepers, the UK pledged a training center for trainers from Nepal as part of a “Training the Trainers” initiative, and Germany pledged six Mobile Training Teams. While these pledges are clearly beneficial, they highlight a continuation in current labor relations set up within UN peacekeeping. Developed countries such as the United States and Europe will provide large amounts of training, equipment, and on occasion highly specialized units such as helicopter squadrons. In contrast developing countries largely from Africa and South Asia contribute the bulk of the boots on the ground and suffer the bulk of the casualties. While there have been some shifts towards greater western participation, particularly with MINUSMA, it's clear that the ministerial represents a continuity not a change in that regard.
A final key result from the ministerial was a large number of highly mobile pledges that should boost the mobility of UN PKOs. In the pledging guide, the DPO requested two quick reaction force (QRF) companies. These formations are motorized, airmobile, and capable of responding to attacks on civilians at a much quicker speed than conventional infantry battalions. Instead of receiving two QRF companies, the UN received QRFs from Bhutan, Indonesia, Mongolia, Nepal, Peru, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Tunisia (x2), Uganda, and Uruguay, but, in some cases, these pledges are smaller than a company. However, UN requests for reconnaissance units and SWAT teams went unanswered. Despite this, when these QRF units are combined with the newly pledged UAV and helicopter formations, UN peacekeeping formations have become significantly more mobile than they were before the Ministerial.
Now that the ministers have left and the conference is over, the work continues. Getting all of these newly pledged units ready for the rigors of a UN peacekeeping deployment and transporting the needed thousands of personnel and thousands of tons of equipment across the globe to get them there, is a colossal logistical and technical undertaking. Political issues may also complicate the new pledges. Kazakhstan was one of the larger contributors in the Ministerial, pledging helicopters, hospitals, and UAV units. However, they have been under fire from the UN after Kazakh military units illegally wore UN blue helmets while policing recent protests against the government. It’s unclear if this dispute will endanger the deployment of Kazakhstan’s pledges, but this incident highlights the types of problems that may occur between pledge and deployment.
In conclusion, the 2021 UN Peacekeeping Ministerial was a solid success. Against a backdrop of falling budgets and questions about peacekeeping's future, the UN was able to significantly improve its capabilities in the key areas of mobility, technology, and medical capabilities. Almost every critical need identified by the DPO ahead of time was filled, with some (such as QRF capability) excessively so. It is extremely probable that these new pledges help ensure that UN PKOs are even more capable of protecting civilians in conflict and building peace in their areas of operation.