Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by UN Peacekeepers: A Threat to Impartiality

Abstract

This article reconceptualizes the idea of the impartiality of UN peacekeeping in light of allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeeping personnel. It considers the role that sexual exploitation and abuse play both during and after conflict. The paper argues that sexual exploitation and abuse are political acts that bring about financial and propagandist benefits for the warring parties. It then tracks the history of neutrality in UN peacekeeping – originally defined as objective inaction against the warring parties – and its development into impartiality – now identified as unbiased interference, but with greater reference to core universal values such as fairness and justice. Peacekeepers’ involvement in sexual exploitation and abuse is of political advantage to the parties and therefore breaches the principle of impartiality.

Acknowledgements

This article is a version of a paper given to the Society of Legal Scholars conference, London School of Economics, September 2008. My thanks go to Matthew Fisher, Rachel Murray and Russell Buchan for their assistance. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views of the United Nations Association UK.

Notes

See Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel White, The Blue Helmets: Legal Regulation of United Nations Military Operations, Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1996, pp.75–81; David Gibbs, ‘The United Nations, International Peacekeeping and the Question of “Impartiality”: Revisiting the Congo Operation of 1960’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol.38, No.3, 2000, p.359; David Roberts, ‘More Honoured in the Breech: Consent and Impartiality in the Cambodian Peacekeeping Operation’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.4, No.1, 1997, p.1; Todd Howland, ‘Peacekeeping and Conformity with Human Rights Law: How MINUSTAH Falls Short in Haiti’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.13, No.4, 2006, p.462; Hikaru Yamashita, ‘“Impartial” Use of Force in United Nations Peacekeeping’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.15, No.5, 2008, p.615.

Nicholas Tsagourias, ‘Consent, Neutrality/Impartiality and the Use of Force in Peacekeeping: Their Constitutional Dimension’, Journal of Conflict and Security Law, Vol.11, No.3, 2006, p.478.

Jane Boulden, ‘Mandates Matter: An Exploration of Impartiality in United Nations Operations’, Global Governance, Vol.11, 2005, p.147.

This definition is from the UN Secretariat: UN, ‘Secretary-General's Bulletin: Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse’, UN Doc. ST/SGB/2003/13, 9 Oct. 2003, para.1.

‘Survival prostitution’ is generally defined as prostitution to gain a livelihood because circumstances of poverty make it one of the few options available to stay alive. But see Noelle Quénivet, ‘The Dissonance between the United Nations Zero-Tolerance Policy and the Criminalisation of Sexual Offences on the International Level’, International Criminal Law Review, Vol.7, 2007, pp.671–3.

UN Security Council resolution 1325, para.10.

Martin Lalumière, Grant Harris, Vernon Quinsey and Marnie Rice, The Causes of Rape: Understanding Individual Differences in Male Propensity for Sexual Aggression, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2005, pp.23–8, 153–4.

Madeline Morris, ‘By Force of Arms: Rape, War, and Military Culture’, Duke Law Journal, Vol.45, No.4, 1996, p.664.

Dyan Mazurana, Angela Raven-Roberts, Jane Parpart and Sue Lautze, ‘Introduction: Gender, Conflict and Peacekeeping’, in Mazurana, Raven-Roberts and Parpart (eds), Gender, Conflict and Peacekeeping, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005, p.4.

See Mark Duffield, Global Governance, London: Zed Books, 2001, pp.136–60.

Mazurana, ‘Gender and the Causes and Consequences of Armed Conflict’, in Mazurana, Raven-Roberts and Parpart (eds), (see n.9 above), p.32.

Although some argue that civil wars are, in fact, a method of asset transfer within societies and therefore the SEA of women has economic instead of, or in addition to, political purposes. See Meredith Turshen, ‘The Political Economy of Rape’, in Caroline Moser and Fiona Clark (eds), Victims, Perpetrators or Actors: Gender, Armed Conflict and Political Violence, London: Zed Books, 2001, p.61.

Duffield (see n.10 above), p.228.

Cynthia Cockburn, ‘The Gendered Dynamics of Armed Conflict and Political Violence’, in Caroline Moser and Fiona Clark (eds), (see n.12 above), p.18.

Amnesty International, ‘Lives Blown Apart: Crimes against Women in Times of Conflict’, AI Index: ACT 77/075/2004, 8 Dec. 2004. Although note that such acts can have wider motivations than merely being seen as a perk of the job. Turshen indicates that temporary marriages can in fact be a way of gaining access to women's property. Turshen (see n.12 above), pp.62–3.

Amnesty International, ‘Making Violence against Women Count: Facts and Figures – a Summary’, 5 Mar. 2004 (at: www.news.amnesty.org/index/ENGACT770342004).

Mazurana (see n.11 above), p.32.

Duffield (see n.10 above), p.228.

Amnesty International (see n.15 above).

Joshua Goldstein, War and Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, p.343.

Amnesty International (see n.15 above).

Ibid.

In fact, they were actually rapes of non-Serbian women but the films were dubbed to make it appear that Serbian women were being raped by Croatian or Bosniak men. See Catherine MacKinnon, ‘Rape, Genocide and Women's Human Rights’, Harvard Women's Law Journal, Vol.17, 1994, p.14.

Amnesty International (see n.15 above).

It is not suggested here that sexual violence in conflict can have only these two political purposes: there are undoubtedly many more. See Inger Skjelsbæk, ‘Sexual Violence in Times of War: A New Challenge for Peace Operations?’, in Louise Olsson and Torunn Tryggestad (eds), Women and International Peacekeeping, London: Cass, 2001, pp.69–84.

Cockburn (see n.14 above), p.25.

UN DPKO, ‘Human Trafficking and United Nations Peacekeeping’, Policy Paper, Mar. 2004, para.4.

UN Secretary-General, ‘Letter Dated 25 May 2006 from the Secretary-General to the President of the General Assembly’, UN doc., A/60/877, 5 June 2006.

Goldstein (see n.20 above), p.343; BBC News, ‘UN Sex Abuse Sackings in Burundi’, 19 July 2005 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4697465.stm); Sandra Whitworth, Men, Militarism and UN Peacekeeping, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2004, pp.67–71; BBC News, ‘UN Probes ‘Abuse’ in Ivory Coast’, 23 July 2007 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6909664.stm); idem, ‘Sex Ban on DR Congo Peacekeepers’, 10 Feb. 2005 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4252405.stm); UN Wire, ‘UN to Investigate Alleged Sex Abuse by Peacekeepers’, 2 Mar. 2001 (at: unwire.org/UNWire/20010302/13293_story.asp); Matt Halling and Blaine Bookey, ‘Peacekeeping in Name Alone: Accountability for the United Nations in Haiti’, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, Vol.31, 2008, p.461; BBC News, ‘UN Troops Face Child Abuse Claims’, 30 Nov. 2006 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6195830.stm); Ray Murphy, ‘An Assessment of UN Efforts to Address Sexual Misconduct by Peacekeeping Personnel’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.13, No.4, 2006, p.531; Roméo Dallaire, Shake Hands with the Devil, London: Arrow, 2004, pp.183–4; Human Rights Watch, Sierra Leone: ‘We'll Kill You if You Cry’, Vol.15, No.1(A) Jan. 2003, pp.48–9 (at: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/sierraleone/sierleon0103.pdf); Global Policy Forum, ‘UN Peacekeepers Criticized’, 22 Dec. 2002 (at: www.globalpolicy.org/security/peacekpg/general/2002/1223peace.htm); BBC News, ‘Sudan to Probe UN Sex Abuse Claim’, 5 Jan. 2007 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6233527.stm); idem, ‘Sex Scandal Prompts UN Overhaul’, 24 Mar. 2005 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4379971.stm).

BBC News, ‘Fears Over Haiti Child “Abuse”’, 30 Nov. 2006 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6159923.stm).

Indeed the UN is not the only organization to find itself accused: NATO, Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and African Union (AU) troops have also faced allegations.

See UN General Assembly, ‘Reports of the Secretary General’, UN doc., A/58/777, 23 April 2004, para.3; UN doc., A/59/782, 15 April 2005, Annex I; UN doc., A/60/861, 24 May 2006, Annex I; UN doc., A/61/957, 15 June 2007, Annex VI.

UNAIDS, ‘Aids and the Military’, May 1998, p.2 (at: data.unaids.org/Publications/IRC-pub05/militarypv_en.pdf).

UN DPKO, ‘Background Note’, 31 Mar. 2009 (at: www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/bnote.htm).

See Ross Fetterly, ‘The Demand and Supply of Peacekeeping Troops’, Defence and Peace Economics, Vol.17, No.5, 2006, p.457; idem, ‘A Review of Peacekeeping Financial Methods’, Defence and Peace Economics, Vol.17, No.5, 2006, p.395.

Peace Women, Gender and Peacekeeping News (at: www.peacewomen.org/un/pkwatch/pknews.html).

UN DPKO (see n.27 above), para.ii,8.

See UN General Assembly, ‘Reports of the Secretary General’, UN doc., A/58/777, 23 Apr. 2004, para.3; UN doc., A/59/782, 15 Apr. 2005, Annex I; UN doc., A/60/861, 24 May 2006, Annex I; UN doc., A/61/957, 15 June 2007, Annex VI.

Barbara Bedont, ‘The Renewed Popularity of the Rule of Law: Implications for Women, Impunity and Peacekeeping’, in Mazurana, Raven-Roberts and Parpart (eds), Gender, Conflict and Peacekeeping, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005, pp.96–7; William Shawcross, Deliver Us from Evil: Warlords and Peacekeepers in a World of Endless Conflict, London: Bloomsbury, 2000, p.62; ‘UN Sexual Abuse Alleged in Congo’, Washington Post, 16 Dec. 2004 (at: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3145-2004Dec15.html); Peace Women, ‘Peacekeeper Jailed for Porn Films’, 23 Jan. 2003 (at: www.peacewomen.org/un/pkwatch/News/03/Irishpeacekeeper.html); BBC News, ‘UN Troops Face Child Abuse Claims’, 30 Nov. 2006 (at: www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6195830.stm).

UN DPKO Training Unit, ‘Ten Rules Code of Personal Conduct for Blue Helmets’ (at: www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/Conduct/ten_in.pdf); a point reiterated by Prince Raad bin Zeid in ‘A Comprehensive Strategy to Eliminate Future Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations’ (Zeid Report), UN doc., A/59/710, 2005, para.6.

UN DPKO Training Unit, ‘We Are United Nations Peacekeepers’ (at: www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/Conduct/un_in.pdf).

Jennifer Murray, ‘Who Will Police the Peace-Builders? The Failure to Establish Accountability for the Participation of United Nations Civilian Police in the Trafficking of Women in Post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina’, Columbia Human Rights Law Review, Vol.34, 2003, p.475; Goldstein (see n.20 above), p.343.

UN DPKO (see n.27 above), para.12.

Ibid., para.8.

Ibid., para.6 (original emphasis).

Whitworth (see n.29 above), p.68.

Dallaire (see n.29 above), pp.183–4.

BBC News, ‘Sudan to Probe UN Sex Abuse Claim’, 5 Jan. 2007 (at: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4379971.stm).

UN DPKO (see n.27 above), para.ii, 7.

Tsagourias (see n.2 above), p.465.

Marrack Goulding, ‘The Evolution of United Nations Peacekeeping’, International Affairs, Vol.69, No.3, 1993, p.454.

Ibid.

See Nigel White, Keeping the Peace, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997, p.235. Peace enforcement covers situations where force is designed to be used for significantly more than just self-defence.

See Mazurana et al. (n.9 above) p.19; Tsagourias (n.2 above), pp.467–79.

Tsagourias (see n.2 above), p.479; White (see n.53 above), p.235.

Derek Bowett, United Nations Forces, London: Stevens, 1964, pp.175–8.

Tsagourias (see n.2 above).

Some have disputed this interpretation of Article 40: see Tsagourias (n.2 above), p.479.

Ibid., p.466.

Goulding (see n.51 above), p.454.

Salman Ahmed, Paul Keating and Ugo Solinas, ‘Shaping the Future of UN Peace Operations: Is There a Doctrine in the House?’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol.20, No.1, 2007, p.13.

Quoting the report submitted to the General Assembly by Dag Hammarskjöld, UN doc., A/3302, in United Nations, ‘Summary Study of the Experience Derived from the Establishment and Operation of the Force: Report of the Secretary-General’, UN doc., A/3943, 9 Oct. 1958, para.12.

Ibid. (original emphasis).

The consent of the host state and neutrality/impartiality are thus best seen as co-requisites for a peacekeeping operation. See Goulding (n.51 above), p.454.

Shashi Tharoor, ‘Should UN Peacekeeping Go “Back to Basics”?’, Survival, Vol.37, No.4, 1995, p.58.

Although some have argued that the UN was not always successful in this endeavour: see Boulden (n.3 above). Some have also disputed this transfer from neutrality to impartiality, arguing that impartiality was expected throughout previous peacekeeping missions too: see Gibbs (n.1 above), p.360.

Goulding (see n.51 above), p.455.

United Nations, ‘Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations’ (Brahimi Report), UN doc., A/55/305, 2000, para.50.

Although see Dominick Donald, who argues that the transfer from ‘neutral’ to ‘impartial’ is not so clear-cut, since UN use of the terms reveals confusion and misunderstanding about their different meanings and roles within peacekeeping: Donald, ‘Neutrality, Impartiality and UN Peacekeeping’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.9, No.4, 2002, p.23 et seq.

Donald adopts a similar definition of impartiality, with the same active/passive distinction: ibid., p.22. Gibbs's description follows the same line of thought, with his explanation that peacekeepers serve ‘universalistic interests’ but not ‘the parochial interests of specific foreign powers’. Gibbs (see n.1 above), p.360. Yamashita adopts a comparable position in arguing that ‘new impartiality’ has come to mean the robust implementation of peacekeeping mandates that include significant humanitarian protection components. Yamashita (see n.1 above), p.627.

Quotes taken from interviews with desk officers at the UN Secretariat by Donald (see n.69 above), p.32.

On the relationship between UN peacekeeping operations and international human rights law, see ‘Peace Operations and Human Rights’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.13, No.4, 2006, pp.457–595.

UN DPKO Peacekeeping Best Practices Section, United Nations Peacekeeping Operations Principles and Guidelines, New York, 2008, p.33. The document also states that peacekeepers are expected to honour international human rights and humanitarian law: pp.14–16.

United Nations High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, New York, 2004, para.203.

Ibid.

See generally David Chandler, ‘The Responsibility to Protect? Imposing the Liberal Peace’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.11, No.1, 2004, p.59; Jennifer Welsh (ed.), Humanitarian Intervention and International Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

UN General Assembly, ‘2005 World Summit Outcome’, UN doc., A/60/L.1, 2005, para.139.

United Nations, Zeid Report (see n.40 above), para.6.

Mazurana (see n.11 above), pp.34–5.

Although it should be noted that this was a general statement about gender-based crimes rather than specific to acts of SEA committed by UN peacekeepers. See UN Security Council resolution 1325, para.11.

UN DPKO (see n.27 above), para.7.

UN DPKO Training Unit (see n.41 above).

Although see Cynthia Enloe, who argues that patriarchy is ‘the big picture’. Enloe, ‘What if Patriarchy Is “the Big Picture”? An Afterword’, in Mazurana, Raven-Roberts and Parpart (eds), (see n.9 above), pp.280–3.

Whitworth (see n.29 above), p.120.