NATO Stability Policing: a new model of peacekeeping

Introduction

Peacekeeping (PK)[1] in NATO falls within the wider remit of Crisis Response Operations (CROs), which effectively address challenges arising mainly from post-conflict situations and aim at providing long-term security to populations. Peacekeeping Operations support weak institutions and local governments, by preventing the resumption of hostilities, and involving other International Organizations, regional and local, public and private actors through a 360 degree-inclusive, comprehensive approach. They also support the reorganization of State institutions, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration activities as well as the return of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees. Over time, peacekeeping operations have evolved from persuading the parties to stop fighting and preventing any return to conflicts, into missions deeply involved in intrastate conflicts to rebuild national structures and civil society while ensuring lasting peace and security. In this vein, within the NATO Stabilization Force (SFOR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina under the UN aegis, a new and unique tool was conceived and then deployed to achieve long-lasting stabilization. On August 6th, 1998 the first Multinational Specialized Unit (MSU) deployed; it was and still is[2] a robust police regimental-size unit equipped and trained to carry out a wide span of police and military tasks across the full spectrum of operations and ranging from the replacement to the reinforcement of Indigenous Police Forces (IPF) to restoring the rule of law and protecting human rights[3]. This idea in time evolved into the current concept of Stability Policing (SP) and its members can be valid contributors to PK due to their inherent characteristics, particularly their military status as well as their civilian- and policing-oriented mind-set.

SP as a new solution in peacekeeping

It was indeed a new model of peacekeeping, more flexible and close-fitting the needs of the local population, oftentimes met by simply delivering basic community policing and empowering members of civil society. In fact, this new holistic approach set conducive conditions to addressing the root causes of conflicts, by ensuring the protection of civilians and humanitarian assistance, as well as re-establishing the rule of law. It was then a natural consequence to bridge with the MSU the so-called “policing gap”, i.e. the capability/capacity enforcement void between the policing-related needs of the Host Nation (HN) populace, and the inability or unwillingness of the IPF[4] or of other relevant actors (including the UN) and the NATO conventional, combat and warfighting instrument of power to address them properly. In this regard, it is worth noting that the requirement for a robust policing capability in CROs, and consequently PK, was confirmed by the famous UN Brahimi report[5]. Then, in 2016, the NATO “Allied Joint Doctrine for Stability Policing” followed. This publication defines SP as “police related activities intended to reinforce or temporarily replace IPF in order to contribute to the restoration and/or upholding of the public order and security, rule of law, and the protection of human rights”.

The two SP missions of replacing and/or reinforcing the IPF are applicable across the full spectrum of conflicts and crises, hence also in PK. If the IPF are unable to carry out their duties, SP can monitor, mentor, advise, reform, train or partner with them to improve their performance. Should they be absent or unwilling to act, SP can temporarily replace them[6] with the main aim to support the re-/establishment of a safe and secure environment, restore public order and security, and contribute to create the conditions for meeting longer term needs with respect to governance and development (especially in the Security Sector Reform - SSR), all significant PK building blocks. In fact, SP contributes with its police-oriented approach to “Human Security”, to the protection of civilians[7] and to a wide array of cross-cutting topics ranging from Women, Peace and Security and Children in Armed Conflict to Conflict-Related Sexual and Gender Based Violence as well as Cultural Property Protection (CPP). In doing so, SP helps preventing countries from slipping back into turmoil and provides stability for reconstruction, recovery and development.

SP peacekeepers

SP operators, who can be employed as peacekeepers, are characterized by having a civilian-oriented, police-like mind-set, and possessing experience and expertise in police matters. This is of critical importance, since they focus on both IPF and the local populace. Hybrid threats[8], the crime-war overlap as well as terrorism and insurgency (the so-called irregular activities[9]), threats to human security and cultural property, including within PK scenarios, are significant and likely to become even more relevant in the future. These asymmetric challenges require SP members to be flexible and adaptive to overcome a rigid, combat-only response, whilst SP offers complementary, innovative and scalable solutions expanding the reach of the military instrument into the remit of policing.

The SP peacekeepers’ effectiveness is enhanced by a tailored curriculum, which improves interoperability and, in addition, endows them with a particular set of a cutting-edge “police-like” skills that match the actual needs of the HN population, including, inter alia:

• Cultural awareness: an in-depth comprehension of the HN culture to inform the interaction with local institutions, police and population.
• The Protection of Civilians: paramount to prevent and mitigate negative effects on civilians of military operations.
• The SP framework encompasses an understanding of the mission, its activities and tasks. It requires familiarity with Rule of Law concepts, HN legal system and NATO relevant policies, doctrines and Technical Tactical Procedures (TTPs), which may differ significantly from their own. As a consequence, the SP peacekeeper needs to undergo:

• Procedural training: SP peacekeepers must be prepared to be interoperable with, and implement, the same TTPs used by the supported Force such as combat lifesaving TTPs, Casualty Evacuation (CASEVAC), Counter-Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED), Close Air Support (CAS) drills, et similia.
• Subject Matter training: It is essential for SP peacekeepers to understand their mission, tasks and subject matter, as well as to be familiar with the HN legal system, as it may significantly differ from their own.

• CPP embraces a large host of activities aimed at identifying, respecting and safeguarding sites and objects of cultural significance as a vital part of people’s identity and of importance for all of humanity. In a nutshell CPP protects the HN heritage. In fact, by preventing, deterring and investigating crimes such as iconoclasm, unauthorised excavations, looting, forgeries and fencing, SP operates in the remit of policing the civilian populace, hitherto neglected by NATO. SP assets identify relevant trafficking routes, investigate and bring suspects to justice, the latter often belonging to Organised Crime or Terrorist Groups (but also war criminals), as well as disrupt their networks.
• Language skills facilitate and foster daily communication and relations with local authorities, population and Police as well as with International Organizations.
• Building Integrity provides for moral and ethical standards to build transparent and accountable institutions, to promote good governance, integrity and transparency.
   
  Conclusions
  Since its creation, the profile of the peacekeeper has been continuously adapting to the changing world, evolving and responding to longer-term and complex requirements of populations and nations in post-conflict scenarios. History shows how pivotal assisting the HN in rebuilding war shattered societies is. A holistic and comprehensive peace-building approach addresses the most immediate military and humanitarian concerns, as well as longer-term requirements such as state re-building, SSR, strengthening civil society and promoting social reintegration. From its very first CRO experience in Bosnia, and then in Kosovo, to the Article-5 operation in Afghanistan, NATO has changed its approach to military interventions in destabilized countries by realizing that from a human security perspective, post conflict strategies must not only include a guarantee of security, but - to protect civilians and to pave the way for longer reconciliation endeavours – they also have to provide humanitarian relief, building social capital, nurturing the reconciliation and coexistence of divided communities and restoring governance. In this vein, the NATO SP peacekeeper strives for building peace by virtue of his/her expertise in law enforcement within a military framework, the so-called “soldiers of the law[10]”, definition that somehow symbolizes all the Gendarmerie-type forces[11], which additional value lies in their flexibility to deliver a military capability focused on the police-related needs of the local population[12]. This multi-pronged, innovative and 360° approach requires a reshaped military strategy that focuses on providing basic security to local communities preyed upon by criminal and insurgents (typically financed by illegal revenues). Indeed, by filling the public security gap and by refocusing the Force’s centre of gravity accordingly, governance improves, and alternative, legal livelihoods thrive. As public support and the battle of narratives are won by the Alliance, the outlook of NATO’s success is significantly enhanced, ensuring long-term peace, security and development.
   

[1] “A peace support effort designed to assist the implementation of a ceasefire or peace settlement and to help lay the foundations for sustainable peace. Note: Peacekeeping is conducted with the strategic consent of all major conflicting parties.” NATO Agreed

[2] Currently deployed within the NATO Kosovo Force (since 10 June 1999)

[3] See AJP-3.22

[4] IPF, “Local police”, “Host Nation Police Forces” and “Law Enforcement Agency” are all understood as having the same meaning

[5] 13 November 2000, https://www.un.org/en/events/pastevents/brahimi_report.shtml

[6] MC 362/1 and MC 362/2 infer that civilian law enforcement is not a NATO function, but NATO may support or conduct it, if so directed by the North Atlantic Council (NAC), see also AJP-3.22, the “Allied Joint Publication for Stability Policing”

[7] NATO Policy for the Protection of Civilians, endorsed at the NATO Warsaw Summit 8-9 July 2016, paragraph 16

[8] A type of threat that combines conventional, irregular and asymmetric activities in time and space. NATO Agreed Term 

[9] The use or threat of force by irregular forces, groups or individuals, frequently ideologically or criminally motivated, to effect or prevent change as a challenge to governance and authority. NATO Agreed Term  

[10] Straight translation of the French expression “soldats de la loi”, which in France directly refers to the gendarmerie

[11] For the purpose of this paper, “gendarmerie” is intended as “a military force performing civilian law enforcement/policing civilians”

[12] “which are the logical first choice” for any SP asset, as per AJP-3.21 “Allied Joint Doctrine for Military Police” para 2.6.3