ai09 THE HILL Just In... Trump congratulate Brazil's Bolsonaro on inauguration: ‘The U.S.A. is with you" Obama's 2019 mossag "We've got a lot of work todo! Rep-elect Crenshaw reveals New Year's, resolutions with series of twoots Ohio doctor fired by hospital after saying she would give Jews ‘the wrong meds’ Universal basic income isa solution in search of a problem Top 5 races to watch in 2019 Report: Vatican letter contradicts US cardinal on delayed vote on Top US commander in Afghanistan tells troops to prepare for any outcome in 201! More than money: Are UN peacekeeping missions effective? | TheHil More than money: Are UN peacekeeping missions effec ‘BY MOLLY M.MELIN, OPNON CONTRIBUTOR. 02/1/171240 PM EST 128 suares United Nations (U.N.) peacekeeping operations have an enormous budget of over $78 billion, with nearly 105,000 peacekeeping personnel deployed around the world to 16 ongoing peacekeeping missions. But are they creating peace? Nikki Haley, the new U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations appointed under President Donald Trump, recently called for reform of global peacekeeping operations. Haley asked the U.N. Security Council two important questions about these costly missions: Are they working and are countries contributing troops “just to make money?” These are questions with answers. In my research with SUNY Buffalo Professor Jacob Kathman, we studied how security concerns motivate states to make troop contributions of Often, the largest troop contributions are from countries facing their own. security challenges. Nigeria and Pakistan, two major contributors, both face international security challenges and have experienced coups. For these states, contributing troops to peacekeeping missions offers training that improves their ability to defend against external threats and also professionalizes them in a way that reduces the risk of coups. Our research reveals 2 somewhat contradictory relationship between the ability of the UN. to provide security via peacekeeping and the insecurity in the member-states that motivates personnel contributions. The ability hitps:/thehl.comiblogs/puredts-blglintemational-affars/219208-more-than-money-are-un-pescekeeping-missions 19ai09 VieWALL ‘More than maney: Ace UN peacekeeping missions effective? | TheHll of peacekeeping operations to provide security is at least partially dependent upon insecurity elsewhere, To be sure, the motive of instability would seem to be a potentially troubling aspect of the peacekeeping process given the U.N’s objective to improve global peace and stability. Policy implications of this may be limited, as no serious policymaker would suggest increasing insecurity in memiber-states to increase contributions to peacekeeping missions It is more reasonable to consider increasing the per-soldier ibursement rate (of about $1,332 per year) to attract contributions from states with more capable, professional soldiers. While even a considerable reimbursement rate increase is not likely to attract contributions from the most capable states, it will ikely attract contributions from new member states as more countries consider the benefits to their budgetary calculations. Such an increase in contributions would allow the UNN. to be selective about which states it relies upon for each mission, potentially optimizing the mix of contributor states to improve effectiveness. If increasing the rate of reimbursement proves untenable, we can perhaps look to our understanding of when and where U.N. operations are most able to be effective and ensure these missions have the peacekeepers necessary to do their important work, Yes, peacekeeping missions have a very mixed record. Some missions, such as Angola, became defined by their failures and show the U.N. does ‘not prevent conflict recurrence or even cease ongoing conflict. In contrast, operations in Cambodia and Northern Ireland were successful in improving the prospects of post-civil war peace, monitoring ceasefires, and avoiding conflict recidivism. It's true that not all peacekeeping operations are equal in creating peace. We can better understand these variations in peacekeeping by understanding how the U.N. chooses where to deploy missions. The U.N. tends to send peacekeepers to very difficult conflict cases, Success in peacekeeping is hard to achieve in part due to the challenging environments where peacekeeping is deployed In contrast to public perception, scholars agree UN. peacekeeping is. effective in ensuring peace and security and_reducing civilian casualties when operations are equipped with larger numbers of peacekeeping troops. Sending larger missions with better-trained troops ensures missions are able to protect civilians, reduce or end cont generate greater cooperation, and contain conflict Having troops to send rests on the voluntary contributions of U.N. member-states. Attracting contributions from states with capable, professional soldiers and ensuring missions are equipped with larger ‘numbers of troops are important elements to consider as Ambassador Haley seeks to reform peacekeeping operations. Molly M. Melin PhD, is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Loyola University Chicago and Public Voices Greenhouse Fellow. She is an expert in international conflict resolution and has published in International Studies Quarterly, the Journal of Conflict Resolution, and Conflict Management and Peace Science. The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill hitps:/thehl comtblogs/pundits-blogintematonal-affasi919208-more-than-money-are-un-peacekeeping-missions 23ai09 More than money: '@ UN peacekeeping missions effective? | TheHll hitps:/thehl.comiblogs/punedts-bloglintemational-affars/219208-more-than-money-are-un-pescekeeping-missions a8