The Disarmament and International Security Committee

Topic: The Question of Diplomatic Immunity for UN Peace Keepers Breaking Local Laws
Country: The Kingdom of Netherlands

The discussion about the agenda in hand goes hand in hand with the topic of who a country calls when
its internal struggle spills out and spews the fumes of an unstable climate in both social, and political
terms. It occurs when a country is in a detrimental state from within its constructs, often caused by
either drug cartels, rebel groups, terrorist organizations or even the military itself. The state it goes into
allows not only political instability to occur but several other things come into play here. What are the
things we are talking about? We are talking about the deaths of innocent citizens, ranging from
women, children to the elderly, who have no involvement whatsoever in the status quo, months of
strikes leading to the downfall of not only the education and financial system, but also the complex
political and societal system as a whole. At that point, when the government itself cannot curb the
smoke of a rebellion, and " diplomatic " chaos, it calls out for the United Nations ( UN ) to aid it; to
which the UN sends the UN peacekeepers to intervene and cease fire between the two parties. The
Netherlands have till 2001, provided its hand to the UN for the battalion of the peacekeepers, believing
the UN will help the Dutch people for its contribution, and also mainly to help stabilize the global
areas of conflict, and reduce the casualties. Unfortunately in 2001, Netherlands ended its participation
in UNMEE in the summer of 2001. The reason for our withdrawal was simple. We had lost trust in the
UN as an association that can execute fruitful peacekeeping operations and there was expanded action
inside NATO, the EU, and impromptu game plans from within.
For the Netherlands specifically, the mission in Bosnia ended up being a calamity. In 1993 the Dutch
government dispatched an airborne unit (named 'Dutchbat') consisting of 1,100 troops to the Bosnian
enclave Srebrenica. Together with five different regions, Srebrenica had been named a 'safe zone' by
the UN. This couldn't keep the enclave being invaded by Bosnian Serb powers in July 1995. Around
8,000 regular people (for the most part men and young men) were slaughtered.

Now, as the first paragraph has clearly stated why and how are the UN peacekeepers called by a
country, the second paragraph will serve the purpose of enlightening the conflict of the local laws and
UN peacekeepers in general. According to the UN doctrine, their personnel have been trained to
respect local laws, but still there have been a lot of allegations from a lot of nations; particularly
Somalia, the Central African Republic, and the Middle East nations mainly. We tell you even after the
Security Council had passed a resolution lamenting on crimes such as sexual abuse and exploitation by
these UN peacekeepers, these events still occur. In spite of their command to keep up peace and secure
individuals in war-torn nations, some UN peacekeepers have themselves become the abusers.
Explicitly announced affirmations of sexual misuse and manhandle by peacekeepers in the Central
African Republic have brought new regard for long-term worries over peacekeepers damaging the
privileges of those they are intended to ensure. Secondly, soldiers from Congo who served as
peacekeepers in the Central African Republic had reportedly killed at least 18 people which included
women and children. A grave found close to a peacekeeping base in Boali, and unearthed on February
16, 2016, revealed the remaining parts of 12 individuals distinguished as having been detained by the
peacekeepers in March 2014. The exhumation of the bodies discredits the peacekeepers' past claim
that these individuals had got away. Who are these individuals? They are mainly victims of
circumstances. Poor people, people who do not even have the finance to lodge a complain, and
worse, they are orphans. Hence, what do we see? We see a path of violation of not only local laws,
but also international basic human rights. All these accumulate not only to the discredit of the UN
as an organization designed to maintain peace, but it also provokes the nation that has called for help
to the UN. That is to say, if you allow these UN peacekeepers to do as they wish, you will allow
someone from another country to break your laws, and do as they wish. This is not only in diplomatic,
but it is also a threat to national sovereignty. Why? Understand this that the laws of any nation is
passed after hours, days and months of debate, and some of them come from the time of
independence. So, when a violation takes place, and the state government is forced to not look into it

1
just because they are from the UN, then a challenge is being issued to the national interests of the
country itself. As a result, when ignorance becomes diplomacy, it becomes a very protruding issue for
the state government, and its citizens.
However, yes in some situations where you have dangerous rebel groups armed heavy artillery, it
becomes a viable solution to break certain laws in order to ensure less casualties. For those situations,
the Netherlands are in acceptance; but to break laws that are constituted to protect vulnerable and
marginalized groups, we are totally against it. Hence, what exactly happens when a government
allows the UN peacekeepers to break local laws? Aside from the provocation of state interests, we tell
you that the people of the country will hold a vendetta against the state. Two things will happen:
A) They will start to adopt the ideology that their current government is not worried about
what happens to them given they are being sexually abused, tormented or even killed
B) Even worse, they will believe that their government is okay with the fact an international
community has authority over them.
When these factors will mix, a country will face more rebellions, and more riots.
So, what solutions does the Netherlands bring to the table for this committee? They are ground rooted
solutions, that compromise from micro-level benefits to macro-level policies. They are as follows:

1. Reparations to the victims, relatives of the people killed by the UN troops, most
importantly, the civilians detained. Monetary incentives are not everything but they can
still allow an individual the finance required to move from the place of conflict to another;
2. Request the UN security council to pass another binding resolution that will punish the
perpetrators with a public announcement. Who are perpetrators? The UN troops who
murder, rape, and torture which at the end of day breaks every local laws;
3. Place high ranking personnel in areas of low development. This will ensure that lower
ranking troops do not take advantage of the circumstances, and they are properly
monitored. These high ranking personnel will have to report to a base that will be linked to
the state government;
4. Make sure the UN peace troops are working in a synchronized manner with the state
troops, and police officials.

Hence, the Kingdom of Netherlands expects a fruitful and engaging committee sessions with feasible
solutions being deduced.

References:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/06/08/holding-abusive-un-peacekeepers-account-0
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/06/07/central-african-republic-murder-peacekeepers
http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/issues/cdu/
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/22/opinions/freedman-un-peacekeepers-immunity/index.html
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13533312.2016.1235095