Let me
start by welcoming our foreign guests to Turkey for this important conference
jointly organized by Bilkent University and the Centre for European Security
Studies. I am grateful for the opportunity to address this gathering of eminent
academicians and senior officials. The subject matter of the deliberations
today and tomorrow is a critical issue for the international community as a
whole; how to conduct effective peace support operations in the 21st century,
at a time of growing demands for international action in the face of
instability and conflict in many parts of the world. I am especially pleased
that the conference will have the benefit of the presence and active
contribution of our friends from Groningen; an ancient city with a university
dating back to the beginning of the 17th century.
There
has been a substantial amount of academic and policy activity over the past
decade to identify the best means for conducting an increased amount of peace
support activity with essentially limited military and financial capabilities.
Peacekeeping is a delicate and expensive undertaking, requiring a robust
mandate, adequate force protection, deployment of scarce military capabilities
and sustained political engagement. The major international organizations with
specific responsibilities in this area, such as the United Nations, NATO, the
European Union and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, have all invested a considerable effort to review and revamp their procedures for
executing their respective, and often complementary, field activities.
Naturally,
Turkey fully supports these efforts. As Director General, in the Turkish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for international organizations, I have daily
oversight of all UN activities in this respect. We are confident that the
establishment of the UN Peace building Commission, the restructuring of the Department
of Peacekeeping Operations and the formation of a separate Department of Field
Support will serve to provide the international community with a higher-quality
service. It has been 61 years since Winston Churchill called for equipping the
United Nations with an international armed force, in the famous Iron Curtain
speech. The world organization certainly has some military clout now; it is
conducting 17 operations with more than 100.000 personnel.
Turkey is keen
to sustain and enhance her contributions in this respect. The UN’s own data, as
of September 2007, declares that Turkey is the 25th largest contributor to UN
operations, with nearly one thousand troops on active duty, while, in terms of
police contributions, we are ranked 14th among UN member states. We are, of
course, also taking part in all NATO operations, with some 2.500 troops, and a
further 2.750 troops on call in the NATO Response Force. We have commanded ISAF
twice, and still have some 1.200 troops in Afghanistan, as well as a Provincial
Reconstruction Team. Furthermore, we have supported the development of the
European Security and Defence Policy from the outset and taken part in every EU
operation to which we were invited. In fact, we are the leading non-EU European
ally in terms of contributions to ESDP missions.
I see
that there is an impressive congregation of experts here to deliberate the
important topics on the agenda of the conference. Perhaps I should briefly
touch upon one of those topics, namely national approaches to peace support
operations, as Turkey has collected a considerable amount of experience in this
field. As I said, we led ISAF twice; once as a UN operation and again as a
NATO-led force. We also currently have nearly a thousand troops in UNIFIL in Lebanon. This body of experience makes it possible for me to make certain observations,
especially with regard to political engagement between the peacekeeping force
and the host country. This is a critical relationship for the success of any
mission, in terms of ensuring force protection for our men and women on active
duty in foreign lands, allowing timely exit from the host country and
preventing a subsequent recurrence of hostilities.
The
first of these observations is that the task of securing and maintaining the
trust of our hosts is the most crucial aspect of peacekeeping work. Naturally,
military planners will insist on the right mix of combat and support elements
and the availability of critical enablers, but without this mutual trust, the endeavor
will almost certainly fail in attaining its objectives. Experience has shown
that remaining equi-distant to the ethnic and religious groups in the host
country is essential. The Turkish military commanders and personnel also avoid
any involvement in the domestic affairs of the country. Transparency in
dealings with all local leaders, whether in government or not, helps to sustain
a constructive two-way dialogue. Full respect for the customs, cultural values
and religious beliefs of the local population is also essential.
We would
probably all agree that local ownership of the responsibility for peace and
stability is highly desirable. However, this will not be possible if local
officials, community leaders and military commanders do not have a culture of
working together, as is often the case. This may well be due to a lack of trust
among those players because of past behavior. The commanding officers of a
peacekeeping force will find it easier to persuade their local counterparts to
cooperate with each other and thus facilitate the establishment of a
broad-based national consensus in the host country, if they have already won
their confidence and respect.
Friendly
patrols on foot, rather than an excessive use of armored vehicles driven at
high speed, are likely to win the hearts and minds of the population. Sensitive
treatment at control posts, for example by ensuring that women are only
searched by female officers, is also essential. Joint patrols with local forces
or police officers may remove any grounds for suspicion by the population
and government officials as to the activities of what is essentially a sizeable
and well-armed group of foreigners. Conspicuous display of arms and weapons
should be discouraged. Where such simple practices are not followed, the
peacekeeping force may quickly resemble an army of occupation.
Regarding
the composition of peacekeeping forces, I note that roughly ten percent of
uniformed personnel in current UN peacekeeping forces is made up of police
officers. This trend should be encouraged further, as the evolving nature of
peacekeeping tasks requires a greater amount of conventional police work in
post-conflict societies. We should also endeavor to get the right ratio of
combat troops and support personnel, as many countries prefer not to provide
combat forces or critical enablers like transport assets or intelligence units,
which are all in short supply.
As a
final remark, I would like to emphasize the need to integrate the political and
socio-economic dimension of peace building into our peace support operations,
in order to create societies that can sustain peace on their own long after
peacekeeping forces depart their country.