MIDDLE-POWER states like Canada cannot take peace enforcement initiatives easily. A dilemma exists about the nature and degree of force such powers are prepared to use.
These points were made by Prof Michael Tucker of Mount Allison University, New Brunswick, at a conference on the Irish and Canadian experiences of conflict resolution and peace-making/peace-keeping.
The Association of Canadian Studies in Ireland, in conjunction with the Craig Dobbin Chair of Canadian Studies at UCD, ran the conference. It provided a rare opportunity to exchange views in a structured setting. We have all talked in each others' mess bars, of course, but such discussions tend to be anecdotal rather than analytical.
In his wide-ranging paper, Prof Tucker discussed choosing priorities. Canada has "alliance [NATO] commitments" as well as a long and unequalled preoccupation with peace-keeping. Its forces are not large, considering its size and its coastal length.
There are normal defence requirements, such as the control of Canadian skies, and so on. The real question is which peacekeeping missions should be undertaken in addition to NATO commitments?
Perhaps Canada's contributions are taken for granted. It has put energy and resources into peacekeeping and disarmament for many years. In addition to military and diplomatic activities, it has supported research and scholarship on the requirements for a peaceful world: the quality and quantity of the literature produced on everything from training to verification are outstanding.
Recently there has been a tendency to assume the United Nations will be confined to a legitimising role for peacekeeping operations, leaving the conduct and control of such operations with the great powers. Sir Brian Urquhart, the former UN Under-Secretary responsible for peacekeeping, was pessimistic last year.
The fashion, he said, seems to be to turn away from UN peacekeeping and hope to contract out future crises to "coalitions of the willing, as yet undesignated ... As one who grew up in the 1920s and 1930s, when the League of Nations was more or less abandoned, I think turning away from the United Nations is a disastrous historical mistake
He suggested the pendulum is swinging back on this matter. The conduct of "Chapter VII", "Desert Storm"-type enforcement operations must be in the hands of a large country with adequate resources, as the last UN Secretary-General has acknowledged. Chapter VI ("consent") operations will probably remain in UN hands. The question of overall control of enforcement operations remains difficult.
It was heartening to hear Canadian support for the UN reiterated. Prof Tucker concluded that because of a powerful sense of duty and devotion to the UN, and because peacekeeping saves lives, Canada's support will continue.
Lieut-Col Ernest Reumiller said Canada believes in the UN and the framework it provides for co-operation between UN agencies and peacekeeping forces. He outlined some lessons of the abortive effort to form a multinational force for the African Great Lakes crisis last year.
The problem, he said, was not lack of warning but lack of political will. There is no effective mechanism for the management of Chapter VII operations. The Zaire coalition was especially difficult - too many voices with too many interests. Smaller powers can only lead in crises where larger powers have no objections. Such an operation must have its own sources of intelligence. Non-Governmental Organisations have their own agendas, which must be understood and respected. International organisations must be prepared to act swiftly and firmly.
On the role of regional organisations, he said NATO was invaluable in Yugoslavia. Not all regional organisations have NATO's capabilities. Nevertheless they have their own strengths.
It seemed generally agreed that there is no real need for new institutions and it is better to work with existing ones.
Lieut-Col Oliver Macdonald outlined Ireland's experience of peacekeeping. Over 43,000 tours of peacekeeping duty have been completed in 42 missions, with the UN, the EU, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and with various humanitarian agencies in Africa.
"Preparedness to participate in peacekeeping missions under the aegis of the UN is one of the roles specifically designated by the Government for the Defence Forces," he said. The 1996 White Paper on Irish Foreign Policy has re-affirmed this, saying: "The Government are committed to sustaining the overall level of Ireland's contribution to peacekeeping". He outlined factors considered when Irish participation in peacekeeping operations is requested. (Canada has similar criteria).
He rehearsed the lessons learned over the years. On the problem of "national contingents or commanders receiving orders from national sources", he stressed the strong Irish view, expressed in the foreign policy White Paper, that "participation by Irish units in UN peace-keeping has always been based on the premise that full operational command in the field must reside with the Force Commander, or head of mission."
Lieut-Col Macdonald stressed the high standard of training required for peace-keeping operations and dealt with the role of UNTSI (the United Nations Training School, Ireland), established in 1993.
Prof Dominic Murray, department of government, University of Ulster (Irish Peace Institute Research Centre), said if people want to kill each other it is difficult to stop them. Peace and reconciliation can only be reached after other steps - such as people getting to know each other.
Peacekeepers must know about their mission but also get the sense of other conflicts. For example, where is decommissioning of arms insisted upon and where not; the policing done in Haiti and El Salvador. He traced five stages of conflict development and listed the elements of conflicts. Outsiders can be convinced their "rationality" is better than that of those in conflict. Timing is important for interventions, as conflict intensities rise and fall.