ISSUE 136 : May/Jun - 1999 - Australian Defence Force Journal

Peace DevelopmentBy Dan Baschiera,Defence Community Organisation“The complexities of Peace are far more difficultto manage than the decisions of War”Shimon PeresWith no definition there is no vision.The United Nations charter has no clear definition forpeacekeeping, therefore, by default, no real vision inpeace management.Peace development (PD) is a longer term strategicoutcome of military based community development(MCD).MCD is a tactical means to bridge the current gapbetween humanitarian aid and peacekeeping.A Short PreamblePost cold war, as the global fabric of stability is tornby the numerous “low tech”, “grey zone” andsocial conflicts, we still do not have any realdefinition for peacekeeping.Peacekeeping has no real definition in the UnitedNations Charter. No definition implies no vision.Something well-demonstrated as peacekeepingstruggles to manage the challenges to peace in ourcurrent democratic paradox -“The New WorldOrder”.In my reading I came across this statement “...anad hoc approach to military and political objectivescarries with it high risk. It is sometimes this approachthat makes managing the peace more difficult thanmanaging the war” (T.R.Dubois). Wise words whenit comes to the challenge of peacekeeping.Peacekeeping in its various forms is currently theonly military based “peace management formula” wehave, and it is ad hoc. It is a formula that struggles toevolve as the phenomena of social conflict and itsgenerated Human crisis accelerates, “in minutesrather than months” (Weinberger).A reporter “in zone” beams our immediateHuman History into millions of homes. For the infieldpeacekeeping commander this can, and does, result ina rapid transition from the tactical to the strategic, andtherefore to the high ground of political diplomacy.Unfortunately this tends to further obfuscate analready ambigious situation. Ad hoc is often anunderstatement.Media coverage of the graphic violence hascreated substantial humanitarian interest and thedesire to do something. The political pressure is ofcourse to do something. But what does “doingsomething” mean?Since the end of the cold war we have witnessedthe emergence of bolder peacekeeping. BolderPeacekeeping implies more than just keeping twoconflicting armies apart, it should imply the use andpromotion of resources in the conflict region to buildfor a longer sustainable peace - a step beyond just“doing something”.However, Bolder Peacekeeping is more often thannot the ad hoc trouble shooting innovation of aninfield commander dealing with a local crisis, ratherthan part of a mandates overall strategic plan. Thebasic problem with bolder peacekeeping, peacemaking, peace development, or whatever label yougive it is the fact that it lacks a strategic vision andcosts money. This is partly why bolder peacekeepinghas not moved toward peace development.Peace Development has to be proactive, effective,and sustainable. It is going that extra mile. It has to bethe tactical implementation of a strategic and effectivepeace. A peace that promotes harmony in the culturaland political ideology of the host community.This article outlines a number of concernsassociated with peacekeeping and suggests a tacticalmodel in Military Community Development that maygive us a pathway to Peace Development.IntroductionPeacekeepers (PK) and Humanitarian Agencies(HA) are and will continue to find themselvesdeployed side by side in the same conflict zone andquite literally in the same foxhole. Traditionally themilitary has not had a role as an emergency reliefprovider and Humanitarian Aid workers, who havethis role, do have differing perceptions andapproaches to that of the peacekeepers. As a result