Military Rules of Engagement in Peace Mission

To say that the rules of engagement in every peacekeeping mission be reviewed is an understatement. A military peacekeeping mission is a combat operation by itself; therefore I see no reason why the UN would send soldiers to volatile regions against volatile militias or rebels while keeping the noncombatant policy knowing that they would be attacked by the fighting forces. We all witnessed the shameful slaughtering of the AU/UN joint forces in Darfur some years back; how soldiers hand guns in their hands, with their eyes opened while they were being attacked by rebels yet they could not fight back because of the policy that puts them in bondage.

It is not surprising that countries like Nigeria who are in the forefront of global peacekeeping mission is now in the forefront of reviewing the so called Rules of Engagement, so that the forces are well armed and has the order to defend and launch assaults. Most people with no knowledge of military operation or peace operations might probably think a peacekeeping mission is just what it is ‘peacekeeping’ but truly a peace mission is a pure military operation and it involves full combat. Peacekeeping should therefore be an enforcement operation as advocated for in the just ended seminar in Lagos Nigeria and as rightly said by the Nigerian President: “as the President of Nigeria, I would not want to lose one soldier carelessly. A situation where militia groups will ambush law abiding international teams that go to their countries to ensure that they live in peace is totally unacceptable.

If the push for this review does scale through, I do not suppose the number of soldiers lost to peacekeeping missions abroad would remain high as it is today. Not even in war situations sometimes do you have such numbers of casualties as in these operations. More so that these soldiers are poorly equipped, they shouldn’t be made to die in a senseless and non dignifying way. Let’s not forget that these soldiers have families back at home and that they are the breadwinners of their families. And leaving their fatherland to go risk their lives for the peace and freedom of other nations is a move that should be respected by the UN and AU. I am happy that 18 countries have currently approved the move for a review at least if not of the Rules of Engagement by of Enforcement.

At least now we know that when we are sending out troops to foreign lands for peace operations, we are not just giving them guns that would not spit out a single fire even if militia groups unleash hell on them all in the name of international law; but with the gun, would also give them the power to enforce peace and protect themselves in the face of attack. I do hope that the world leaders would rally round and support this move so that a repeat of the Darfur experience would not come to play anymore and the policy makers need to get out of their comforts to know what practicalities go round in troubled zones.