Canada's Peacekeeping Policy

Introduction to Peacekeeping in Canada

History of Peacekeeping

Current Peacekeeping Missions

Canada's Peacekeeping Policy

Canada's Peacekeeping Policy was explained in the following two interviews:

Melissa: I have been studying peacekeeping for the project and my first question is, who is it that decides to send peacekeepers to a particular mission?

Mr. Jordan: "The United Nations, generally, because the peacekeeping initiatives are done under the command of the United Nations. So they will assess the situation in particular where it is in terms of the conflict and then will request peacekeepers and make the commitment. It's done under the United Nations flag and you'll notice that the peacekeepers themselves will wear the blue beret of the United Nations. Now I think that's an important point, it's not one country unilaterally deciding to do this, it's done under the United Nations. Now on rare occasions NATO might decide that the peacekeeping activities are required, but generally it's the United Nations, and they're coordinated. You'll get situations where the lines of command can vary through different countries. It's a multi-lateral effort and it's implemented and monitored by the United Nations. It's important that the people on the ground trust the peacekeepers and don't think that they've got some kind of agenda."

Jennie: So for like other missions that Canada's done it wasn't Canada's decision to send them it was United Nations?

Mr. Jordan: "Canada can decide to participate; the mission itself is defined by the United Nations. It's almost like, they'll put out 'we want to go into X country and countries can decide. They'll negotiate. Canada will say we can supply so many people for so long, and it's a bargaining."

Melissa: My second question is, what is Canada doing to encourage people to join the military?

Mr. Jordan: "That's a real problem in Canada. In terms of the larger topic, safety and security, one of the things that I think Canada has got to expedite a little bit is a process that results in a clear definition of what we want our military to do. All you hear about is that it's not funded, there's a real problem with trying to attract Canadians to go into the military. I think part of the problem is that we're trying to be all things to all people. A country the size of Canada, in a new century, I'm of the view, and maybe we're getting ahead, but I'm of the view that a peacekeeping element is something that Canada, I think, can do at a global scale well. Combat probably is not. So until we define what we want the military to do, I think it's hard to get people to make that kind of commitment, they don't know what they're getting into. The other problem we have is that once they acquire certain skills in the military it pays a lot better than private sectors. So after their initial sign up period if they've acquired computer skills, or if they're a lawyer or a doctor, I mean they have to stay a certain amount of time, but our pay scale doesn't compete with a private sector. So what's the Canadian government doing? Probably not anything close to what they should be doing. But at the end of the day it comes down to resources. We are currently undertaking a foreign policy review, which will take a number of years, from that process I think we'll have a clear definition of the various components of our security system, what they're supposed to be doing."

Jennie: Who does that review?

Mr. Jordan: "Foreign Affairs. What they essentially will do is hire a few experts and they will spend two years crossing the country, holding hearings and trying to get some sense, from Canadians, of what their views are on this. It's not only a case of the Canadian military changing, the world is changed and what you need your military for essentially is changing. It's all on the table right now."

Melissa: Are we devoting too much of our military time, effort, and money to peacekeeping?

Mr. Jordan: "Conceptually, I would probably say no, we're not. One of the challenges we face in peacekeeping is that there's a difference between peacekeeping and peacemaking, and there's been some criticism that, the United Nations in some cases has sent in peacekeepers when the combatants don't want peace. That puts the peacekeepers in a dangerous position because they're not equipped for that, and there's been some failures. Somalia, the Rwandan genocide, where the United Nations choose not to act, but again I think it comes down to clear definitions of when peacekeeping's appropriate. And I think we have probably used peacekeeping in situations when they weren't ready for it and it was still conflict. Unless both sides accept and respect the initiative it's putting the people that are trying to do it into very precarious situations. So I think a lot of times there's an attraction to want to put peacekeepers in because that somehow signals the end of hostilities, but if hostilities really aren't over I don't think it's fair to put people in that situation."

Mr. Gollinger: "I think of peacekeeping efforts as part of Canada's total humanitarian aid package. I am appreciative of the peace keeping efforts made on our behalf, but, would point out that we have failed to keep our promise made internationally to provide minimum percentage of our Gross National Product to these efforts. I would be willing to pay more towards these efforts. Also, in either case we should devote more of our efforts towards peace keeping or even peace making."

Melissa: Are we jeopardizing our own internal security by trying to protect other countries?

Mr. Jordan: "Oh, I don't think so. I think one of the things that Canada has benefited from, in terms of their international credibility, is the emphasis on peacekeeping. Keep in mind that it was Canadian initiative, originally. So, I think that most countries in the world see Canada as a peaceful nation, and I don't think that is ever going to affect your national security in a negative way."

- Joe Jordan

- Bob Gollinger