.

Poor nations pay dearly for peacekeeping

KATHLEEN KENNA
STAFF REPORTER

10/06/03 (Toronto Star) Tragedies such as the blast that killed two Canadians in Afghanistan last week are keeping rich nations from peacekeeping, experts warn.

"Governments don't want to put their troops in harm's way," said David Wimhurst, political affairs officer at the United Nations peacekeeping office.

Critics of international peacekeeping complain that wealthy nations pay the bills while poorer developing countries provide the soldiers.

"The financial burden is carried by richer countries while the physical burden is carried by poorer countries," Wimhurst said from New York.

The United States, the largest donor to U.N. peacekeeping, pays more than $700 million a year but sends no troops.

However, there are 453 Americans working as military observers and military police under the U.N. flag.

Other big-money donors are Japan, France, Germany and Britain, whose annual contributions top $100 million.

None of these come close to the top of manpower contributions: Pakistan leads, with 4,180, then Bangladesh with 3,925, India with 2,933 and Nigeria (1,744).

Canada is No. 8 on the money list but No. 33 in manpower.

Yet it's cited for special honour on the Web site of the U.N. department of peacekeeping operations.

"The small island of Fiji has taken part in virtually every U.N. peacekeeping operation, as has Canada," it states.

The two are matched in current manpower — 237 peacekeepers each — although Fiji sends slightly more troops, at 206 to Canada's 197.

There are about 37,000 peacekeepers from around the world in 15 current U.N. missions.

"Contributions to peacekeeping operations by the industrial world have significantly dropped off since the Cold War, about 10 to 13 years ago," Wimhurst said. "Developing countries now make up 70 per cent of all troops" on U.N. missions.

"It's not fair."

Developing countries seek the international prestige and experience offered by U.N. peacekeeping, as well as the $1,000 (U.S.) per month per soldier paid by U.N. member states.

Developed countries, haunted by disasters in Rwanda and Somalia, don't need the trouble.

The once-cherished notion that peacekeeping is a universal responsibility has been shattered by messy conflicts where fighters don't respect international forces or universal laws and treaties.

The deliberate targeting of aid workers and unarmed civilians has prompted relief agencies to withdraw services and potential peacekeeping nations to balk at sending troops.

"We're extremely worried about security" in Afghanistan. "We're worried about the long-time risks to Canadians and others there, as well as the Afghanis," said David Lord, co-ordinator of the Canadian Peacebuilding Co-ordinating Committee (CPCC) in Ottawa.

The CPCC is a six-year-old partnership of 100 Canadian NGOs (non-government organizations), think-tanks and universities. It takes policy concerns on peacebuilding to the federal government and offers strategies.

"Afghanistan is a dangerous place that seems to be not progressing," Lord said from Ottawa. "The promises to rebuild Afghanistan are not being delivered. The promises by donors (for reconstruction funds) are not being delivered.

"There's a growing danger — we're in more danger of serious trouble there."

Canada is the largest donor of troops among the 31 countries involved in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), sending 1,950 troops or 40 per cent of the total.

Like most rich nations, Canada is turning increasingly to non-U.N. missions that meet the demands of the United States and other wealthy states. The ISAF venture is under NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), as are the missions to the Balkans.

"Canada is following the tradition of developed countries to contribute troops to coalition peacekeeping and NATO peacekeeping and not United Nations peacekeeping,' said William Durch at the Henry L. Stimson Center, a non-profit, public policy institute in Washington, 

"Canada is known for its peacekeeping but it doesn't stand out today," said Durch, author and editor of several books on U.N. peacekeeping.

Meanwhile, the debate in Canada continues between those who want to hike military spending for the U.S.-led war on terrorism and continental defence and those demanding a larger, post-Cold War "peace dividend."

The Canadian military spreads itself from Afghanistan to Bosnia-Herzegovina, on $13 billion a year.

"Even though we have small numbers, we're making a difference in Afghanistan, in Bosnia, in Africa," said Richard Blanchette, director of peacekeeping policy at the national defence department in Ottawa.

"We're really stretched."