* Continued. Beginning in No. 12 for 1998

The coalition nature of military peacemaking

A peacekeeping operation in its organization and conduct, as well as in the composition of its participants, is, as a rule, "united" (synonym - "joint"), i.e. multinational and multicomponent (according to the branches of the armed forces, national and departmental affiliation of the involved law enforcement agencies and civilian bodies, international and regional institutions (institutions), non-governmental or non-governmental organizations).

The multinational, coalition composition of military forces is one of the hallmarks of a"joint operation". This is a special feature of the Council of Europe,which, in our opinion, should appeal to the UN structures involved in peacekeeping. First, coalitionism as a sign of internationality symbolizes that this operation, despite military troubles for the warring parties, is carried out at the will of all (or most) members of the world community of nations. Secondly, the anonymity of the most sharp and painful military actions of "forcing peace" for the warring parties is preserved (such as the" surgical " strikes of NATO aircraft on Bosnian Serb positions during the May and August 1995 exacerbations of the conflict in the Balkans).

It is obvious that the combat core of the peacekeeping forces are the contingents of the regular armed forces of the States participating in a particular peacekeeping process (operation). It should be recognized that the command, headquarters and troops of the Joint Armed Forces of NATO are the most trained for the role of military peacekeepers today. (Recently, for example, the US Armed Forces have adopted a number of special charters: FM 100-23 "Peacekeeping operations", FM 100-200 "Operations other than war", an addition to the main charter of FM 100-5.)

The CIS peacekeeping force contingent is a matter for the future. The Russian Armed Forces, in fact, are the only ones in the post-Soviet space, gaining much-needed experience in the current geopolitical situation in providing military and political support for traditional peacekeeping in Transdniestria, Transcaucasia, Central Asia, and the Balkans. A well-established, politically flexible and militarily effective peacekeeping mechanism is essential for the entire post-Soviet space.

Maintaining peace and stability in the CIS is of key importance for the security of Russia and all the newly independent States of the Commonwealth. The CIS is recognized in the UN as a region (resolution of the UN General Assembly of 24.03.94), but with a reduced function on the right of the Commonwealth to independently conduct regional peacekeeping operations in accordance with the Provisions of Chapter VIII of the UN Charter. Since the above-mentioned conflicts in the CIS region, in the settlement of which Russia plays an active role, are non-international, moreover, peacekeeping operations are carried out at the request or with the consent of the relevant States and conflicting parties (i.e., military peacekeeping actions are not compulsory in the sense defined in the UN Charter), the CIS is fully aware of the It can be a regional security organization recognized by the world community, which is no more or less deprived of the rights to the nature and scope of military peacemaking, initiative and independence in making appropriate political and military-strategic decisions. (Joint Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation dated 29.03.94)

Signs of a military campaign

According to the hierarchy of spheres of military art, a peacekeeping operation can hypothetically be a sub-strategic campaign consisting of consecutive or parallel combat, non-combat and support operations, the geographical scope of which is determined both by the conflict zone and the length of communications, and by the number of States that have allocated forces and funds for the operation.

One of the most important problematic tasks in such an operation is to synchronize the actions of all participants in time, space and goals, which is achieved by the rigidity and centralization of command, continuity, reliability and efficiency of communication, support and intelligence, and flexibility of the military-strategic leadership.

Multiple outputs

The theory and practice of military peacemaking allows us to draw the following conclusions:

1. Peacekeeping operations are a special type of non-traditional military operations of the coalition national (multinational) armed forces, approaching in form and military-technical content to local wars (low-intensity armed conflicts - military actions other than war), and in terms of military-political goals to the "strategy of indirect actions".

2. The organization, planning, conduct and provision of peacekeeping operations have analogues in the theory and practice of modern military art, in particular, it concerns the military-strategic format of the so-called "joint operations" in military conflicts of low (medium) intensity. The sub-strategic scale of "joint operations", the heterogeneity and multicomponent composition of the forces and means involved, structures and institutions, the principles of coordination of political, diplomatic and military-technical measures, actions and goals of the coalition participants, the zoning and local nature of combat operations are directly consistent with the appearance and essence of the operation of the peacekeeping forces.

3. A peacekeeping military action carried out in the form of a joint operation is projected on the geographical area covered by the conflict in the form of a" third force", which creates a precedent for international military intervention with the aim of demilitarizing the instigators and participants of the conflict, translating it into a political dialogue and compromise solutions. The" third force", sanctified by the UN mandate, seems to legalize the war, making it larger, much more powerful in terms of the forces and means involved than those possessed by the warring parties, because of which, in fact, there was a need for a specific military action to force peace. This is the whole paradox of the phenomenon of the "third force" as an extremely harsh variant of the use of armed violence in the interests of international peace and stability, which therefore requires no less strict and authoritative measures of political and civil leadership, management and control. Peacekeeping coalition contingents are a kind of physical carriers of the" third force " operating on the field of confrontation between the conflicting parties. They are higher than the latter and stand above them according to all the norms and laws of international law. They constantly balance the scales of justice by choosing their opponents: restraining, threatening, punishing, separating, isolating, and reconciling... In general, they work for the policy of ensuring peace, stability and security.

4. The recognized rule of military peacekeeping operations is the complete subordination of the art of war, military strategy and the political strategy of international peacekeeping, as formulated in the UN Charter. The military, if necessary, is obliged to stop any brilliant, in their opinion, military operation at any stage of its preparation and development. The main factor in the effectiveness of managing the peacekeeping process is not the question of who should be the leader in managing operations, but the cooperation of the military with the civilian leadership.

5. Military actions, any military impact on the conflicting parties that do not comply with the requirements of the international community, are by no means the central action of peacemaking, but only a prerequisite for political decisions. The strategic content of peacekeeping operations is mainly determined not by direct military actions, but by the use of their results.

Problems instead of conclusions

I would like to briefly focus on a new element of peacemaking - preventive diplomacy, which was put forward in the report of former UN Secretary-General B. B. Gali as a fundamental basis for the rapid response of the world community to threats to peace and security.

On the one hand, the main provisions of the report largely became political guidelines in creating a modern doctrine (strategic concept) of military peacekeeping. On the other hand, it provides an opportunity to present a military interpretation of the principle of "preventive diplomacy" in the peacekeeping process.

In essence, the military part of" preventive diplomacy " has always had and will continue to have the right to exist. The task of peacekeeping forces in the context of "preventive diplomacy" will be to use force in any region of the world or to stop a conflict at its earliest stage.

Along with such a warning or deterrent point, "preventive diplomacy" also contains a recommendation to make UN peacekeeping efforts more decisive, with a transition, if necessary, from maintaining to establishing peace. Modern theoretical views and a number of military actions demonstrated in the last decade during the implementation of UN peacekeeping efforts suggest a wide range of so-called "joint operations" to force (establish) peace within the framework of a broad interpretation of UN "preventive diplomacy". These include, as the scale increases: demonstration of force, including through military exercises in the conflict zone; armed struggle against terrorist groups; armed provision of unhindered movement on land, at sea and in the air, mine clearance of sea areas of land areas; establishment of a blockade in order to isolate the State that violates the peace, as well as the use of force in the conflict zone. as well as areas (hotbeds) of confrontation with UN peacekeeping efforts; applying selective strikes from the air or sea; conducting an operation involving mainly the Air Force and Navy, as well as a limited contingent of ground forces; carrying out a full-scale operation involving all types of armed forces, creating a powerful ground group.

The US Army field charter FM 100-5 "Conducting combat operations" includes a special section regulating the activities of troops in conducting peacekeeping and establishing peace. The United States has stepped up its activities through the UN Security Council's Military Staff Committee, intending to assist in the creation and maintenance of an effective command, communications and intelligence system for the UN. Parts and subunits of the branches of the US armed forces are trained in special programs for participation in military peacemaking. Similar work is being carried out in NATO: at the session of the NATO Council (November 1994), the MC-327 directive of the military committee "Operational planning of NATO peacekeeping operations" was approved; a new concept of the "Interethnic Operational Forces for Crisis Management" block was adopted (with options for creating groups involved in this by NATO and the WEU).

All this requires an exceptional approach to the development of the theory and practice (art) of preventing and managing military conflicts. However, here we face a number of fundamental problems of using the power component in the" preventive diplomacy " of peacemaking.

The first problem is to determine the composition of forces and means of deterrence that can make an impression on the parties involved in a conflict that threatens peace.

The second problem is determining the moment of deployment of the peacekeeping contingent for the purpose of its subsequent, while demonstration, use in a deterrent action.

The third problem is how to ensure the effectiveness of deterrence.

The importance of solving these problems is obvious, since peacekeeping allows for preventive diplomacy, but completely excludes the preventive, proactive option of starting and developing a peacekeeping operation. The peacekeeping forces are deprived of the right to strike first, and are doomed only to a retaliatory military action.

These problems can certainly be solved by developing a modern international doctrine of military peacemaking. The intellectual potential of the UN is sufficient for this. There is a certain structural reserve - the Military Staff Committee of the Security Council of this organization, the reanimation of which is extremely necessary in the interests of military peacekeeping. We are also encouraged by the organization of Temporary Reserve and Endowment Funds of the United Nations to finance expensive peacekeeping operations, solve the problem of forming a reserve of UN peacekeeping forces from regular troops of a number of states in order to meet the increased needs of the world community for military peacekeeping, and respond quickly and flexibly to conflicts in accordance with the principles of "preventive diplomacy".

Постоянный адрес данной публикации: