The Soldier and the Task Austria’s Experience of Preparing Peacekeepers FRANZ KERNIC Different kinds of peacekeeping missions require different kinds of training and, correspondingly, different kinds of soldiers to carry out the mission. An empirical study of the experience of Austrian soldiers participating in UN operations before and during the deployment in the former Yugoslavia (FOR) and on the Golan Heights (UNDOF) sheds light on the fact that IFOR soldiers show a stronger military orientation. Military aspects within their motives for applying for UN peacekeeping service are stronger than that among UNDOF soldiers. Furthermore, they show no real interest in the culture and language of the country or region where they are going to be deployed. But, on the other hand, they rate their own military skills (including use of weapons) very highly and want to be seen as ‘real soldiers’ or ‘warriors for peace’ rather than as ‘peacekeepers’. The results of the study suggest improvements in preparation and training for peace support operations. This article aims to shed light on the correlation between the soldiers” motivation to volunteer for peacekeeping missions, the type of peacekeeping (for example, the mission mandate), and the kind of training. Since many smaller countries recruit their soldiers for peacekeeping missions on a primarily voluntary basis, we can empirically examine the question whether different types of peacekeeping correspond with different motives for signing up. We also have to examine the correlation between mission mandate and the type of soldiers required for carrying out those missions. This question is, of course, highly relevant for all troop- contributing nations regardless of whether they recruit their ‘peacekeepers’ ona voluntary basis or not. Is it really enough to train soldiers for combat missions and adapt them later for peacekeeping or peace enforcement as necessary? This leads us to the final question to be addressed in this article: whether different kinds of peacekeeping require different types of training (which might also produce different kinds of soldiers). This article focuses on the Austrian experience in selecting and preparing soldiers for UN peacekeeping operations. The analysis is based Franz Kemie is Visiting Scholar at the Research Department, George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. International Peacekeeping, Vol.6, No.3, Autumn 1999, pp.113-128 PUBLISHED BY FRANK CASS, LONDON114 INTERNATIONAL PEACEKEEPING upon empirical data from surveys carried out among Austrian soldiers participating in UN operations before and during the deployment in the former Yugoslavia (IFOR) and the Golan Heights (UNDOF) in 1996. This research approach enables us to compare two different groups of Austrian “UN soldiers’: on the one hand, UN soldiers who participate in a so-called ‘traditional’ UN peacekeeping operation (UNDOF), and, on the other hand, soldiers experiencing one of those ‘new’ peace supporting operations (IFOR, then SFOR) which are generally known as ‘second-generation peacekeeping’ ? In addition, some of these findings are compared with the results of recent studies conducted in countries such as Norway, Sweden, Canada, Italy, France, the Netherlands and the United States.? There can be no doubt that, from the early 1960s until the late 1980s, the image of the Austrian UN soldier in public opinion was that of a ‘good fellow’ willing to contribute to the maintenance of peace in an area of conflict than that of a ‘real soldier’ or ‘warrior’. But, today, this image of Austria's blue helmets in public is at stake, Nowadays, two major concepts of peacekeeping are competing. Both imply different views about the type of soldier needed to accomplish the mission successfully. Whereas the traditional concept of UN peacekeeping has always been very close to the idea of a ‘diplomat in uniform’, new peace-enforcement and peace- supporting tasks seem to require a type of soldier that can be described either as a ‘global policeman’ or as a ‘warrior for peace’.* The hypothesis of this analysis is that the concept of a ‘warrior for peace’ is gaining acceptance among Austrian UN soldiers and the Austrian Ministry of Defence. Similar developments have been observed among a number of European countries such as Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Italy and the Netherlands.‘ Presently, Austrian peacekeepers seem to be divided into two different groups — warriors and (traditional) peacekeepers. Each group shows its own “face” and has its own way of perceiving the soldier’s role in a peacekeeping operation. For some soldiers, peacekeeping means to do the job of a warrior, for others, it is understood as a humanitarian task, a guardian of peace. In order to examine the correlation between the type of peacekeeping mission (for example, the mission mandate) and the type of soldier carrying out this specific peacekeeping task on the basis of the available empirical data, the main issues to be addressed are: (1) an analysis of the motives for Austrian soldiers to volunteer for UN service; (2) a description of the soldiers’ expectations of their tour of duty; (3) a comparison between Austrian IFOR and UNDOF soldiers with respect to their motives to volunteer for the peacekeeping job, their expectations of their tour of duty, and theirAUSTRIA’S EXPERIENCE OF PREPARING PEACEKEEPERS 115 general ‘self-image’ as soldiers; (4) an analysis of the experience of the Austrian soldiers in the cultural environment of Bosnia, on one hand, and the Golan Heights, on the other hand; and (5) an analysis of the question which kind of training is needed in order to accomplish the peacekeeping task successfully.’ Empirical Data and Methods This article refers primarily to the comprehensive study which has been published recently under the title ‘On the Sociology of UN Peacekeeping. Results of Social-empirical Studies Among Austrian UN Units’. This investigation was conducted both as a quantitative study based on several surveys (using questionnaires and interview techniques) and a field research study (daily observation)’ In detail, this analysis is based on the following empirical data: (1) An UNDOF survey (using questionnaires) among Austrian UNDOF soldiers prior to their departure to the Golan Heights (January/February 1996; N=172). This survey focused on the motivation of the Austrian UN soldiers for joining the UN troops, the soldiers’ expectations of their mission, and their attitudes towards UN service in general. In total, 172 men completed the questionnaire: about 87 per cent of all personnel of the Austrian UNDOF rotation of January/February 1996 and approximately 45 per cent of the Austrian UNDOF battalion (AUSBAT). (2) An IFOR survey (using questionnaires) among Austrian IFOR soldiers (AUSLOG) prior to their departure to Bosnia (February 1996; N=188). This survey was based on the same questionnaire as for UNDOF soldiers. The survey was conducted a few days before the first Austrian IFOR contingent left for Bosnia and 188 soldiers completed the questionnaire, which means that about 64 per cent of the contingent (294 men) responded. This response rate must be considered very high since at the time of the survey an advance party was already on its way to Bosnia. GB Field research including research diary, documentation, and personal interviews among UNDOF and IFOR soldiers (January 1996 — June 1997). The field research included face-to-face interviews with soldiers before, during, and after their UN service. Part of this field research was conducted by a team of psychologists (Austrian Military Psychological Service) at Visoko, Bosnia, in June 1996. UN service is voluntary in Austria, Conscripts may take part in UN peacekeeping missions after completing their regular six months basic