detainees accused or suspected of being involved with terrorism may fuel the hatred that terrorists need in order to recruit new members for their cause. For those who know only poverty and suffer for all their lives, believing in a fantastic world is easy, and all what the new recruits must do to pursue his terrorist mission is to believe that terror is the only way s/he can change his miserable condition.
Terrorism works by inculcating fear in a population, and as a result the government loses its credibility, because their citizens expect a certain level of security from the State they live. However, if the government itself acts in an aggressive way against its population, for the purpose of fighting criminals or terrorists, the government loses its credibility in the same manner. In both cases, the terrorist wins some deference from the population.
The objective of the present study is to show an alternative solution to the fight against terrorism, since the War on Terror, despite its achievements, needs to be readdressed in order to eliminate the causes that make a terrorist come into existence. By preventing the root causes of terror, the ideals and beliefs of terrorism will be weakened.
In order to show how terror can be fought on the long term, and be expelled from a specific population (minorities in a fragile country, for example), it is necessary to understand some important issues:
- Who has the authority to combat terrorism?
- What are the causes that proportionate terrorism to begin?
- What efforts have been made to fight terrorism?
- What is terrorism, what are the terrorists’ objectives and motivations?
- What are the rules and laws that regulate this situation?
International terrorism, like any threat to international peace and security, is within the jurisdiction of the United Nations Security Council, which is responsible for authorizing, or not, measures against rogue countries or governments that stimulate or support terrorist activities, including the use of force, i. e., military activities, economic embargoes, arms embargoes, among others.
For the purpose of this study, we will present the different kinds of peace operations carried out by United Nations, for three reasons, which show the relation between terrorists, in one side, and Blue Helmets in another:
- Terrorism is more likely to raise and be sustained in fragile countries, with a weak sovereignty, because groups can maintain their activities without local repression;
Example: Al-Qa’ida terrorist training camps were made possible in Afghanistan only because the national government was not able to detect and stop its activities.
- Governments that do not respect, or do not care for the human rights of its population create also a good field for hiring new members for a terrorist cause.
Example: religious and ethnic intolerance and hatred between Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda resulted in terrorist acts in which women and children were killed or mutilated (children which had their hands chopped by machetes in order to cause fear to the entire ethnic group).
- When the Government uses force arbitrarily to maintain its power among its population, some citizens may join rebel forces to protest, and this helps terrorists.
Example: the energic way the Haitian Political Police (Les Tonton Macoutes) dealt with the population during the government of Jean-Claude Duvalier (Bébé Doc) may make Haitians oppose the government, and give support to local gangs to struggle the State (this support is usually indirect, with food, fuel and hiding from the authorities).
Countries with these sorts of problems, in the past and nowadays, are of concern of the United Nations Security Council when they become a threat or breach to international peace and security, and some of them had, or still has, a Peace Operation deployed in its territory. Since they are used to this kind of operation, and are trained to deal with this situation, the Blue Helmets can be an alternative solution for the menace of terrorism, if properly authorized and employed.
In this study we will present the evolution of peace operations implemented by the United Nations, the principles and guidelines that guide their activities, its origins during the Cold War, their change of role and responsibility after the end of the Cold War, the reformulation of its objectives after a period of retrenchment, and its main successes and failures.
Later on, we will expose the main legal instruments that may be applicable in international relations among states and individuals, embodied in the rules of International Humanitarian Law, whose obligations should be respected by all actors involved, the Governments, the military, the other stakeholders and the UN personnel.
What terrorism is, how it was used by individuals and governments in different places of the world and during the human history and for what reason, what are the primary or secondary targets of terrorist acts, and where and how terrorism is more likely to flourish, will be explained in the sequence.
Then we will introduce the controversial discussion about the legal definition and jurisdictional competence for examining allegations of terrorism acts and prosecuting its actors, definition of high importance for the repression of this kind of crime, and necessary not to evade from the rule of law when taking coercive measures.
Conflicts of competence may arise when two or more jurisdictional organs believe they are the only responsible organ for proceeding criminal procedures against terrorists. These conflicts may happen between States, or between a State and an international court. The legal doctrine to solve this impasse is presented thereafter.
For a better comprehension of the UN System, we will also review the UN Charter, its objectives, its main organs and attributions, especially the Secretariat and the Security Council, their role and capacity in dealing with a peace operation and receives a report about acts of terrorism, in order to respond to it accordingly.
A brief study of the main Resolutions from the Security Council, Res 1373 (2001), 1456 (2003) and 1566 (2004) is made, in order to show the main efforts, and consequences, of the directions given in order to face the terrorist menace.
Finally, two main topics deserve attention concerning the War on Terror:
- Are the available instruments of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law adequate to face the new challenges that terrorism presents? Are IHL a setback when fighting terror, or the, or a solution to fight terror properly?
- Is the Sovereignty of a State disrupted when another State, or a coalition of States, or the International Community, takes an action within its territory against terrorist groups? Is it possible that this action targets the State’s Sovereignty, or shields it from local actors?
A reasonable answer to all these questions is necessary if the International Community wants to address long-term solutions to menaces against international peace and security. Certainly this study cannot provide all these solutions, but our objective is to bring new ideas, methods and procedures to the attempt of solving a problem that is known to exist throughout history, and is far from ended.
The title of this paper was inspired in the letter of Saint Paul to Timothy, 4, 7 (“I fought the good fight. I finished the race (also translated as career in some languages). I kept the faith.”). Since the translation of the Bible has some differences in every language, it is used the expression “combating the good combat” instead of “fighting the good fight” because the version of the Bible in Portuguese uses the verb “to combat”, and this verb is more related to armed conflicts.
2. HISTORY OF PEACE OPERATIONS
Before the UN Charter, some efforts were made in order to prevent a conflict to arise, mainly by regional actors. Some examples are the Delian League of Ancient Greece in the Fifth Century AC, the Pax Dei (Peace of God) and Treuga Dei (Truce of God), by the medieval Catholic Church, prohibiting all kinds of hostilities in certain occasions (from the first Sunday of the Advent to the Epiphany, or from Wednesday afternoon to Sunday morning, in memory of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ).
Later on, Emeric Crucé offered, in 1623, an option for conflict prevention. H
is idea was that all state leaders, within Europe or not, should make an alliance in order to settle international disputes through mediation at a world council held in a neutral location. This idea was followed by other peace-oriented agreements like the Peace of Westphalia (1648), Utretch (1713), and Paris (1763).
The first system that attempted to deal thoroughly with conflict prevention was the League of Nations, created after the First World War, with the mission of regulating the use of force in the disputes between States, using collective diplomacy and peace enforcement. Unfortunately, it could not stop World War II, so the United Nations were created, in 1945, not to regulate war, but to prevent an armed conflict, ipsis litteris, “to prevent future generations from the scourge of war” (Preamble of the UN Charter).
According to the UN Charter (Art. 1), war is not a licit mean of conflict resolution, and any dispute shall be solved by pacific means, according to the principles of International law. The use of force is a prerogative of the Security Council (Chapter VII), against acts threatening international peace and security, and only when other measures will have been made ineffective, like the interruption of diplomatic relations or an economic embargo. The use of force is also possible in cases of legitimate defense, against an armed aggression (Art. 51).
There’s no legal provision for Peace Operations in the UN Charter. The Security Council may decide that there is a breach of international peace and security and, using the powers of Chapter VI (Pacific Settlement of Disputes) and Chapter VII (Acts in cases of Threat to Peace, Breach of Peace and Acts of Aggression) of the Charter, drafts a Resolution with a specific mandate, using military forces with the objective to preserve peace between warring parties.
Due to the disagreement between the two superpowers of the Security Council (USA and USSR during the Cold War, Peace Operations were created as a solution for conflict resolution, a resort to other means to preserve peace and stability. They began as unarmed observers of ceasefires between States, and later included troops from different countries, and the use of force was legal only in self-defense. Ultimately, Peace Operations include efforts to reconstruct the political institutions and the Rule of Law of a given country.
Peace Operations are not an exclusivity of the UN System, although the majority of the soldiers deployed today use the UN Blue Helmet and distinctive UN signs on their fatigues. Regional Organizations, based on the dispositions of Chapter VIII of the Charter, and authorized by the Security Council, may use troops to prevent threats or menaces to peace and security. For example, we could recall the Inter American Peace Force, created in 1965 by the Organization of American States (OAS) and deployed in the Dominican Republic to prevent violence to arise due to the political instability following the assassination of the dictator Rafael Trujillo in 1961.
UN Peace Operation’s history may be distinguished in three different periods: during the Cold War (1948 to 1987), following the Cold War (1988 to 1996), and the resurgence of Peace Operations (1996 to today).
2.1. PEACE OPERATIONS DURING THE COLD WAR
Military observers (MO’s) were used for the first time in 1947, during hostilities in Indonesia, to supervise a ceasefire signed between the Royal Dutch Army and the Indonesian Government, and assist in the repatriation of Dutch forces. It used the powers of Chapter VI of the Charter, mainly diplomacy.
The Security Council took a decision against a breach of the peace during the Korean Crisis, in 1950. However, it was not a Peace Operation, because the forces were not under the direction of the Secretary-General, or the Security Council.
The first Peace Operation was created to face the Arab-Israeli Crisis, in 1948, after the creation of the state of Israel. United Nations Truce Supervision Organization in Palestine (UNTSO), which is working until today, has the mission to monitor if the truce is observed by the warring factions. The name “peacekeeping” wasn’t mentioned, but it was the first time that military observers were deployed after a conflict.
The principles of impartiality and consent were defined by Ralph Bunche, among other principles that guide the organization and functioning of UNTSO. He also decided that military observers should not carry any kind of weapons, in order to prevent an engagement against them by any party.
The controversy about the nationality of the military observers was resolved by requesting personnel to all members of the Truce Commission. They remained linked to their respective national army for administrative purposes, but received orders from UN authorities, and received their national payment plus an UN allowance. They wore an UN armband over their national uniforms.
With the help of UNTSO mediators, Israel signed armistices with four Arab States (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria). The Security Council gave autonomy to UNTSO and placed it under the authority of the Secretary-General, becoming the first peacekeeping operation in UN history.
It is expected from the host countries (that receive the UN troops on their soil) a high degree of cooperation with the UN staff, and assurance for of their safety, according to the Conventions of Immunities and Privileges of the United Nations.
The peacekeepers have the competence to deal with complaints concerning the ceasefire made by local civilians or the separated parties. Monitoring a ceasefire means report any act that may be interpreted as hostile towards one of the parties, for example:
- Presence of troops or equipment in demilitarized zones;
- Presence of defensive areas in demilitarized zones;
- Shooting across a demarcation line between the parties;
- Over-flights on prohibited airspace;
- Unauthorized crossing of the demarcation line.
Other UN Observation Missions were deployed at the India-Pakistan border in 1949 and also 1969, Lebanon in 1958, Yemen in 1963, Dominican Republic in 1965. All of them had straightforward tasks, like monitoring a border area, supervising the retracting of troops or a ceasefire or an armistice, and usually with a limited duration.
2.2. PEACE OPERATIONS FOLLOWING THE COLD WAR
The rivalry between the two superpowers began to diminish after the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, and the consequences of the arms race with the USA to the Russian economy. The new policy implemented by Mikhail Gorbatchev, called Glasnost (Political openness) and Perestroika (Economic restructuring) decreased international tensions, and the relations between Soviet Union, later Russia, and the USA changed, from competition to cooperation.
After the Cold War, new peacekeeping missions were deployed, with the support of the two superpowers, and accomplished their missions:
- UN Good Offices Mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan (UNGOMAP) in 1988, to monitor the withdrawal of Soviet troops, and receive complaints concerning violations of the ceasefire;
- UN Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group (UNIIMOG) in 1987, to establish and monitor ceasefire lines, and supervise the withdrawal of forces;
- UN Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM) in 1988, to monitor the withdrawal of Cuban forces from Angola, and supervise the peace process carried on by warring parties;
- UN Observer Group in Central America, in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua (ONUCA) in 1989, whose complex mission was to observe the compliance of the governments in stopping supporting irregular forces and insurrectionist movements (including the use of facilities of radio and television broadcast for military operations), and to not attack one State through the territory of another state;
- UN Transition Assistance Group, in Namibia, to supervise the ceasefire with South Africa, to monitor the retracting of South African troops, as well as rebel movements.
Other Missions during the 1988-1996 period were considered a failure (RAM, Sunil. The History of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations following the Cold War, pg. 219), because of:
- Passivity in Bosnia, due to the lack of commitment in restructuring the local police, the judicial system, and the maintenance of law and order;
- Lack of efficiency in Hai
ti, because UNMIH was not able to qualify the Haitian National Police and promote national reconciliation and economic rehabilitation;
- Insensitivity in Rwanda, because it didn’t react in time to prevent the genocide;
- Too much agressivity and lack of commitment in Somalia, because international humanitarian relief agencies were robbed by militias and armed bandits.
Other reasons for the failure of some peacekeeping missions is the change in the nature of the conflict, from the Inter-State conflicts characterized by the dispute between the two superpowers and their allies, to intra-State conflicts, with many local armed factions, irregular forces and militias, who respect ceasefires only when it gave them a military advantage.
After some setbacks, Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali concluded his Supplement to An Agenda for Peace (Idem, pg. 180), in January 1995, reiterating the need of a strict adherence to the principles of consent, impartiality and minimum use of force, and warned of the danger of deceiving the distinction between peacekeeping and peace enforcement. The latter should be delegated by a major power or a regional organization.
Also, the cornerstone principles of peacekeeping have been interpreted, in order to be used in a more pragmatic way:
- Consent shall be given at the strategic level (by the state authority) rather than the tactical level (by the population);
- Impartiality (not taking sides in a conflict) is different than Neutrality (not interfere in the internal affairs of a country);
- The UN shall be prepared to defend civilians, even if the mandate is not explicit about this power, because such mission is expected by the presence of UN troops.
2.3. RESURGENCE OF PEACE OPERATIONS
The failures of some peacekeeping missions during the period 1988 – 1996 led to major changes on the size, scope and complexity of this kind of UN instrument. Multidimensional objectives were included, so the Blue Helmets are to have skills in human rights, civil policing, electoral assistance, refugee relief, and nation-building abilities, Basic military skills are still necessary, but it is not enough.
The missions of alleviating human suffering and create institutions to build a self-sustaining peace are the same, but the methodology has changed.
These multidimensional peacekeeping missions consist of a military component, that is armed, but eventually it may not use weapons, and a civilian component for the nation-building tasks. The basic objectives of these new peace operations are to:
- Prevent a conflict before it begins, or impede it to cross the borders of the country;
- Monitor a ceasefire and stabilize a conflict situation, in order to create conditions for a lasting
Combating the Good Combat - How to fight Terrorism with a Peacekeeping Mission Page 2
