A recent investigation by the BBC’s Panorama found that Indian peacekeepers were among those engaged in smuggling drugs, arms, gold and ivory at the UN mission in Congo. In a recently released report, UN Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) found three army personnel guilty of minor charges but did not find evidence of the more serious ones. (Indian Express, 11 June).

Indian blue helmets were certainly not the only black sheep. But that India finds some of its troops in the dock should provide little comfort to defenders of India’s continued involvement in the poorly equipped, mandated and governed operations that characterise UN peacekeeping.

In response, the Indian government has reflexively tried to put a brave face over the allegations, pointing out that the offences are trivial, and that disciplinary action will be taken against those found guilty. Now, the UN itself has little incentive to pursue the allegations aggressively. Given that there is more demand for peacekeepers than its member nations are willing to supply, it is hardly likely to do anything that will embarrass countries — most of them from the developing world — that do contribute troops. So it was perhaps the outcry over the Congo episode that compelled it to announce that “the same (Indian) peacekeepers will not be accepted in future missions”.

The entire business of UN peacekeeping suffers both from big power apathy and from international red-tape. During the Rwandan genocide in 1994, Major General Roméo Dallaire, the Canadian commander of the UN contingent, complained that “the poorer contingents showed up ‘bare-assed’ and demanded that the United Nations suit them up”. That’s not all. It was the first time that the Canadian general was out in real combat!

... contd.