1 / 18

Participation in International Peacekeeping: Analytical Framework

Participation in International Peacekeeping: Analytical Framework. Norihito KUBOTA Visiting Scholar, University of Toronto National Defense Academy Japan. Table of Contents. Current situation of troop contribution for international peacekeeping Purpose of study

aliza
Download Presentation

Participation in International Peacekeeping: Analytical Framework

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Participation in International Peacekeeping: Analytical Framework Norihito KUBOTA Visiting Scholar, University of Toronto National Defense Academy Japan

  2. Table of Contents • Current situation of troop contributionfor international peacekeeping • Purpose of study • Analytical framework: “who persuade who” • Application(Fiji, Canada, and Japan) • Conclusion *The views or analyses shown in this presentation will represent neither those of Japanese government nor the organization which the presenter belongs to.

  3. Military Deployments in Global Peace Operations (Source: CIC NYU, 2009)

  4. Top Twenty Troop Contributors to UN Mandated Operations: 31 October 2008 Source: CIC NYU, 2009.

  5. Purpose of Study • To establish general but meaningful framework of analysis of states’ participation in international peacekeeping • Previous research of supply-side of peacekeeping • Country specific explanation ->Lack of generality, unable to expand to other cases • Theoretical/Large-N statistic analysis ->Lack of meaningful implication • Research Strategy • Comparative analysis of countries (limited numbers) • Using previous country specific analyses (Canada, Ireland, Fiji, India,…)

  6. Definition of Peacekeeping • “in-country operations that are authorized by a multilateral body, that are multinational in their composition, that have a substantial military component, and that are deployed principally in support of a peace process or conflict management objective”(CIC NYU Annual Review ofGlobal Peace Operations) • Including both UN-led and non-UN-led operations(i.e. UNFICYP, ISAF) • Excluding war fighting (i.e. OEF, OIF), small political mission, unilateral intervention. • Although the roles of civilian and civilian police in operation are getting more important due to the evolution of complex operations makes, this study mainly focuses on military.

  7. Analytical Framework: Three Actors Model “Who persuade/enforce who?” • Second-level analysis, Foreign policy model • Government (Prime Minister/Foreign Office, etc) • Military Institution(Army, SDF,…) • Public (Public Opinion) Government (+-) Preference Relation Public (+) Military (+)

  8. Preference of Government (1/2) Motivation in Diplomacy and Foreign Relations • A Condition to be a member of certain diplomatic group or status • Permanent Membership in SC of UN, member of NATO/EU • Competition with rivaling country over regional hegemony • Linkage of other issue (in relation with the US) • BMD for Canada in Afghanistan • North Korean issue for Japan in Iraq • Helping allies in trouble • Geostrategic interest (influence over the area in conflict) • Reimbursement from the UN is good source of foreign currency in developing country (troop)

  9. Preference of Government (2/2)Motivations in Domestic Politics • A tool for “Rally round flag” effect (national unity) and diversionary effect • A method in which government can export unpopular militaries during transition from military regime to democracy (Argentina) • Measure against unemployment (Youths were sent as reserves)

  10. Preference of Military • A good rational for size of military in peace time • A good rational for maintaining/increasing defence budget(remodel of weapon system) • Occasion for multilateral military exercise • Ameliorating image of military which was damaged in previous history • Source of foreign currency (MO in UN operations) • Generally reluctant, because it is not the main job of national defence • Distance matters (logistics, communications)

  11. Preference of Public • Being “do-gooders” in international community • Sense of independence from super powers (support for middle power diplomacy) • Compassion for the people under conflict (“we have to do something”) • Can be casualty sensitive • Distance matters (cultural and ethnic similarity influences on their preference)

  12. Application: Fijian Case, problems • Reimbursement matters? • Two problems • In 1979, payment of reimbursement was uncertain • Fiji has sent military not only as Troop (reimbursement is paid through government), but also as Military Observers (salary and allowance are paid to individual). • ->MO is not beneficial to government who is motivated by receiving foreign currencies

  13. Application: Fijian Case, Explanation • Before the Coup 1989 • After the Coup Government (+) Government (+-) Public (+-) Military (-) Public (+-) Military (+) 60% were regular force Participated as MO and Troops 60% were reserves Participated only as Troops

  14. Application: Canadian Case (1/2) • During the Cold War and early 90’s Government (+-) Military (-) Public (+)

  15. Application: Canadian Case(2/2) • Late 90’s thereafter • UN Peacekeeping • Non UN operations Government (+-) Government (+-) Public (+-) Military (-) Public (+-) Military (+)

  16. Application: Japanese Case(1/2) • During the Cold War • After the Cold War Government (+-) Government (+) Public (-) Military (+-) Public (+-) Military (+-)

  17. Application: Japanese Case(2/2) • Late 90s thereafter • UN Peacekeeping • Non-UN operations Government (+-) Government (+) Public (+-) Military (+-) Public (+-) Military (+)

  18. Conclusion • The three-actor model can be valid to explain behaviour of various types of countries (empirical verification required) • If we need to keep up with demand for peacekeeping, we have to encourage countries to participate in operations with paying attention to whose and what kind of benefit should be presented to them • In this framework, the present patterns of persuasion is similar between Canada and Japan

More Related