Peacekeeping and the Global War on Terrorism

Liegeois, Michel [UCL] Caliskan, Murat [UCL]

Recently, the international system has to face new challenges, among which terrorism and more broadly, violent extremism, is ranking high in the international security agenda. Hence, in addition to traditional challenges, the United Nations also have to deal with these new threats, particularly within the framework of the peacekeeping operations (PKOs). This convergence between peace operations and counter violent extremism strategies has already been illustrated, for instance, by the fact that the mandates of several peace operations (such as in Mali, DR Congo, Central Africa or Libya) have been modified by the Security Council so that peacekeepers can fight against violent armed groups. Moreover, many United Nations bodies dealing with the fight against terrorism are co-financing certain peacekeeping missions. Such a convergence between two ranges of activities that premised on very different foundations raised several issues – i.e., capability, compliance, legitimacy – this article aims to highlight. First of all, it will question the ability of peacekeeping missions to carry out counter-terrorism and counter violent extremism tasks. The study will look at the relevance of a political response to these new threats so that states affected by violent extremism are able to defeat it (i.e., strengthening governance, stronger and reliable institutions, re-establishing the rule of law, respect for human rights) while many authors promote a security response. Secondly, the mandate of several peacekeeping missions has been modified by the Security Council in order to include the fight against terrorism. This raises the question of the compliance of these new mandates with the fundamental principles of peacekeeping underlying PKOs (impartiality, rules of engagement). Thirdly, in the wake of John Karlsrud, this research considers that it is important to focus on the potential impacts of a merger between peacekeeping operations and counter-terrorism missions. Indeed, if peacekeeping activities are modified for the sake of counter-terrorism, not only their legitimacy could be endangered but such a move might well move away the whole concept of PKOs from its initial objectives, i.e., reducing armed violence, monitoring and supporting a peace process and paving the way for long term peace-building processes. The study would remain incomplete without critically questioning the recently overused concept of ‘stabilization operation’ as a distinct category of operations that aims incorporating both countering violent extremism and establishing long-term stability.