U.N. Forces Using Tougher Tactics to Secure Peace

The New York Times ^ | May 23, 2005 | MARC LACEY

[Murtyo]

NAIROBI, Kenya, May 22 - The United Nations, burdened by its inability to stave off the mass killings in Rwanda in 1994 and by failed missions in Bosnia and Somalia, is allowing its peacekeepers to mount some of the most aggressive operations in its history. The change has been evolving over the last decade, as the Security Council has adopted the notion of "robust peacekeeping" and rejected the idea that the mere presence of blue-helmeted soldiers on the ground helps quell combat. It is most obvious in Congo, which commands by far the largest deployment of United Nations troops in the world. Peacekeepers in armored personnel carriers, facing enemy sniper attacks as they lumber through rugged dirt paths in the eastern Ituri region, are returning fire. Attack helicopters swoop down over the trees in search of tribal fighters. And peacekeepers are surrounding villages in militia strongholds and searching hut by hut for guns. "The ghost of Rwanda lies very heavily over how the U.N. and the Security Council have chosen to deal with Ituri," said David Harland, a top official at the United N.....

[Murtyo]

UN Appears to be having to deal with realities!!!

[dirtboy]

The United Nations, burdened by its inability to stave off the mass killings in Rwanda in 1994 and by failed missions in Bosnia and Somalia, is allowing its peacekeepers to mount some of the most aggressive operations in its history.

Yeah, agressively raping the local women, apparently.

[Owl558]

"Yeah, agressively raping the local women, apparently."

From now on UN troops will be using tougher tactics to enforce their food for sex, oil for food, and child rape for food programs.

And who said they couldn't reform?

[/sarcasm off]

[Murtyo]

I'm no conspiracy theory person, but I don't like the idea of UN troops controlling vast areas of the third world - a new imperialism - with concievably fewer checks that the old British/French/Euro imperialism from the 1800's/1900's. Once the UN starts out with "aggressive" peacekeeping in one place on one basis I'm not sure it will be easy to stop.

[corlorde]

I don't know what the solution is, but something should probably be done, even if it is the UN.

[righttackle44]

". . .the Security Council has adopted the notion of "robust peacekeeping" and rejected the idea that the mere presence of blue-helmeted soldiers on the ground helps quell combat."

So, now do the blue helmets wave their hands and yell "Booo," or what?

[adam_az]

Attack helicopters swoop down over the trees in search of tribal right-wing fighters. And peacekeepers are surrounding villages in militia conservative strongholds and searching hut by hut house by house for guns.

Coming soon to a combat theatre near you.

This is just practice.

[Murtyo]

that's what my "inner conspiracy theorist" fears.

[ryan71]

You think they'll actually shoot somebody?

[Murtyo]

the UN soldiers?? Sure. Read this story about the Irish Army in Africa about a year ago. I'm sure this stuff happens in lots of UN Missions fairly often http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1104428&issue_id=10269
(Registration Required - free) or http://www.atlanticblog.com/archives/001343.html (no registration needed)