Cimic

International Journal of Peace Studies, Volume 11, Number 2, Autumn/Winter 2006

THE PEACEBUILDING DILEMMA:

CIVIL-MILITARY COOPERATION IN STABILITY OPERATIONS

Volker Franke

Abstract

The nature of complex humanitarian relief, peacebuilding, and reconstruction missions increasingly

forces military and civilian actors to operate in the same space at the same time thereby challenging their

ability to remain impartial, neutral and independent. The purpose of this article is to explore the cultural,

organizational, operational, and normative differences between civilian and military relief and security

providers in contemporary stability operations and to develop recommendations for improving civilmilitary

cooperation (CIMIC) in order to aid the provision of more effective relief, stabilization, and

transformation operations.

At 8:30 a.m. local time on October 27, 2003 an ambulance packed with explosives

rammed into security barriers outside the Red Cross headquarters in Baghdad killing

some 40 people, including two Iraqi International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)

employees, and leaving more than 200 wounded. The ICRC announced immediately

following the attacks withdrawal of its international staff from Baghdad, thereby reducing

vital programs and services to the most vulnerable segments of the population. The

October suicide bombing came two months after the August 19 attack on the United

Nations (UN) headquarters in Baghdad that left 23 people dead, including Sergio Vieira

de Mello, the Secretary General’s Special Representative in Iraq. Expressing horror and

consternation, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) head Mark Malloch

Brown surmised on the day of the August attack: “We do this [humanitarian relief] out of

vocation. We are apolitical. We were here to help the people of Iraq and help them

return to self-government. Why us?” (quoted in Anderson, 2004, p. 52).

The outrage felt by some members of the non-governmental organization (NGO)

community was not solely directed at the perpetrators, but also at the United States who

was held indirectly responsible for the deaths of the humanitarian aid workers. Members

of the UN and NGO communities felt they were endangered partly by the fact that the

U.S. was fighting a war that had not been authorized by the Security Council and that had

created a situation which had basically invited the attacks. Anderson (2004, p. 61)

6 The Peacebuilding Dilemma

explains, “those who attacked the UN were not mistaken as to their targets or what they

stood for. They understood both that the UN had stood aside from the US-led war but

also that the UN and NGO groups collectively are not neutral or impartial about the

nature of future peace.”

The attacks illustrate a growing dilemma in stability operations: post-conflict

reconstruction and humanitarian relief efforts force military and humanitarian actors to

operate in the same space at the same time challenging the bedrock principles that

characterized peacekeeping for more than half-a-century. Although the military has

consistently emphasized the need for “complementarity,” humanitarian organizations

have expressed concern about the impact of civil-military cooperation on their ability to

remain impartial, neutral, and independent in fulfilling their core tasks. As a result, the

lines between neutral peacekeeping and relief efforts and non-neutral peacebuilding and

reconstruction activities have become increasingly blurred, thereby raising dangers and

risks especially for civilian actors.

This article explores the cultural, organizational, operational, and normative

factors that shape the approaches of military and civilian nongovernmental (NGO) actors

to civil-military cooperation (CIMIC) in peacebuilding and stability operations. The

purpose of the analysis is to develop recommendations for improving civil-military

cooperation in order to aid the provision of more effective relief, stabilization, and

transformation operations. The first segment briefly recounts the evolution of

peacebuilding and illustrates the central problems inherent in civil-military cooperation

during Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Next, the article examines more

closely the cultural, organizational, operational, and normative differences that hamper

coordination between civilian and military actors in the field. The analysis concludes

with a series of recommendations for how to improve civil-military cooperation and

enhance the effectiveness of international peacebuilding and reconstruction efforts.

The Evolution of Peacebuilding

Traditional peacekeeping during the Cold War was authorized under Chapter VI

of the UN Charter and most generally comprised the “imposition of neutral

...