In an insightful interview, Mr. Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations at the United Nations, discusses the evolving landscape of peacekeeping, its challenges, and its future in a world fraught with conflict. Here, Lacroix shares his perspective on the relevance of peacekeeping, the complexities of peace operations in Africa, and the role of diplomacy in ensuring lasting peace.
Is Peacekeeping still a relevant notion? Since 1945, the world has never experienced more conflicts than now… It seems there’s less and less peace to keep?
If you ask displaced persons in Central African Republic or in South Sudan, protected by our peacekeepers, they might answer you it’s very relevant. Vulnerable civilians have never asked peacekeeping mission to leave.
From a bigger perspective, peacekeepers are making sure that ceasefires are respected, that violations are being reported. There are countries where peacekeeping preserves an unstable situation from falling into utter chaos – a number of countries in Africa are in that category.
But peacekeeping operations face the same issues that the U.N. is facing in terms of peace and security. Our biggest challenge is that our member states are divided – competition often prevails over the choice for collective action to resolve crisis. We’re also facing the evolving nature of conflict, proliferation of non-state groups, the strong impact of drivers such as climate change, natural resources, the new enablers, the digital technology, the evolving threats, fake news, disinformation. So, all of this is becoming the daily reality of our peacekeepers. We’re working on how to adapt.
We’ve seen some African countries, such as Mali, requesting the departure of UN Peacekeeping missions. What does it say?
Relations with the host countries are not always easy, because we have a mandate, political objectives given by the Security Council, and the host country may have priorities that may not be fully converted with the S.C. priorities: there’s a fine line where we can deliver on the mandate without alienating the host country. Sometimes we’re even in disputed territory which adds hot sauce to the dish.
In Mali, The United Nations Multi-dimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) had to depart because of the decision of the host country – I don’t see any other case. Peacekeeping is always very political, and it serves political objectives – efforts towards peace and a political solution.
When Democratic Republic of Congo started to request the withdrawal of MONUSCO (United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo), the Security Council heard its plea and MONUSCO left South Kivu. It only took a few months for M23 rebels and Rwandan forces to attack Goma and the region. Do you think a heavier MONUSCO presence could have prevented this?
What’s happening with the M23 and the crisis in North Kivu, spreading over South Kivu, is a regional conflict that doesn’t speak its name. It has the potential of escalating into a broader regional conflagration, which we want to avoid. So that makes the presence and the activity of MONUSCO, at least in those areas, important. But it raises the question of how can we operate in an interstate conflict, with neighboring states actively involved. This situation requires more than the presence of peacekeepers. It requires heavy political, diplomatically lifting.
It’s an ongoing conflict, and the situation will have changed tremendously between now and publishing. Still, what would be a good balanced position for MONUSCO if this diplomatic lifting brings stabilization?
A progress on the diplomatic front, cessation of hostility, and let’s say, a return to a situation where there is a peace to keep: then MONUSCO will be ready to support those efforts and stabilize the area.
Peacekeepers need a peace to keep, still peace is always fragile and volatile. So, it really needs to be supported by diplomatic efforts. It applies to Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, it also applies everywhere. Peacekeepers are doing their best – but that’s not enough: they need to be supported by strong, active diplomatic engagement to achieve long, lasting, durable political solution. Today, this is much more difficult to achieve because our member states are less committed and less united.
In late December 2023, after 15 years of debate, The UN Security Council signed on to a framework for channeling U.N. funds to African Union led peacekeeping missions – another African solution. How do you think the DRC conflict could impact that decision?
We think resolution 2719 is an important decision because UN peacekeeping cannot do everything, especially they can’t do Peace Enforcement. So, we’ve been working with the African Union, and now have a roadmap and advanced in all key issues to be better prepared for these missions.
The UN peacekeeping budget is around $6 billion. The US are the largest contributor and vote of the next budget will take place in June – Do you expect any change with the change of U.S. administration?
We have to make sure that the added value and cost effectiveness of peacekeeping are well understood. It’s also important that we carry on our adaptation efforts. But our know-how in planning and deploying peacekeeping operations is quite unique and we need to preserve it. Beyond this, how united or disunited our member states will be when voting budget is beyond our control.
We’ve heard the US Trump administration has big plans for the future of the occupied Palestinian Territories. How will UNIFIL and UNDOF have to adapt?
They are currently adapting. UNIFIL is actively involved in supporting the implementation of the ceasefire agreement in Lebanon, working with the Lebanese Armed Forces and also liaising with the Israeli Defense Forces. A number of additional capacities that are relevant to the current challenges have already been deployed: mine action engineering, Explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) clearing and all that kind of thing. The situation is different for UNDOF (The United Nations Disengagement Observer Force), our operation in the Golan Heights. It has been very instrumental in preserving the ceasefire and the relative calm in its area of operation for decades. With the political changes in Syria, security concern has been expressed by both parties, Israel and Syria, and UNDOF is a tool for preserving any escalation, any misunderstanding, liaising between two parties.
Cyprus, which is not far from that zone, has been a key place for Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) logistics. Do you know if Donald Trump has similar “Real Estate” plans for Cyprus that he has for Gaza?
Our peacekeepers have been in Cyprus for many decades and have played a critical role in preserving stability on the island – which has helped the political dialog to continue. There’s actually momentum now. A lot of efforts are currently being made on the political front, and we hope that that would result in positive outcomes.
Jean-Pierre Lacroix (centre), Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, visits the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) on February 22nd, 2022. He arrived in Bunia, the provincial capital of Ituri, in the eastern DRC. This is the first stop on his three-day visit to the DRC that will take him to Goma and Kinshasa.
Again, you see the crucial importance of peacekeepers role being complemented by strong, sustained political efforts… Only, these efforts take very, very long time usually to show results. But if you are at the UN, you need to be patient – and patience doesn’t mean passivity.
What is the most stressful moment you’ve encountered since you started in 2017?
That’s really when you have to make sure that the team and the missions are well coordinated. I experienced it recently with the evolving situation in Goma: Peacekeepers have taken the initiative rightfully so, to protect a number of civilians against armed combatants. And some have unfortunately been killed and others injured. You have to fully dedicate your attention and then make sure information is well shared. To alleviate the pressure, I usually go out and exercise, or try to run a couple of kilometers. I wouldn’t call it stress though: we have to be ready, because it happens. And what helps is to know that our expertise in handling crisis is really very high.
Considering the current world changes, how should PKO be shaped? If you had a magic wand, and could redesign things for them to be more effective, what would be the main modifications you’d implement?
A magic wand would be for more appetite for collective solution to crisis from our member states, as opposed to competition – that would be the magic. One practical thing I’d like to see is more flexibility in the ability of this organization to allocate human resources. A number of our rules are too rigid, the posts you have at your disposal are all defined in detail and it’s very difficult to change the skill set. Those initiatives are supported and eventually endorsed by Member States, but then we don’t get the kind of resources that we need to implement them. We’d need more consistency.
About The Author
