Soldiers and Civil Power : Supporting or Substituting Civil Authorities in Modern Peace Operations

Abstract

Peace operations became the core focus of many Western armed forces after the Cold War. The wish amongst political and military leaders during the 1990s to hold on to the classical identity of the armed forces as an instrument of force made them pursue a strict separation between military operations and the civilian aspects of peacekeeping, such as policing, administrative functions, and political and societal reconstruction. In his book Soldiers and Civil Power, Thijs Brocades Zaalberg argues that this policy failed to match up to reality. Supporting civil authorities, and at times even substituting them (de facto military governance), became the key to reaching any level of success in Cambodia, Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo. As a result of the false segregation between the civilian and the military domain, this was accomplished mostly by improvisation and creativity of commanders who probed for the limiting boundaries of their original mandate by reaching ever further into the civilian sphere

Inter‐organisational communication in civil–military cooperation during complex emergencies: a case study in Afghanistan1

“…NATO CIMIC doctrine as it emerged from the 1990s is founded in conventional war fight ing and outdated peacekeeping doctrine. Despite the addition of 'support to the civil environment', the focus of military personnel involved in CIMIC tends to be on supporting military objectives rather than enabling the military to make a co herent contribution to international political objectives in (post) conflict situations (Brocades Zaalberg, 2006). US Civil Affairs doctrine, although broader in scope, places a similar emphasis on pursuing military objectives.…”

Civil-Military Cooperation in Response to a Complex Emergency

“…However, at a local level 3 a tremendous responsibility devolved on the battalion commanders and their junior officers in each of these operations as a result of the gap between the assigned mission and the requirement to establish order on the ground. They had to tailor much of their operations to the unexpected challenges they faced, rather than execute the sort of mission they were tasked, organised, and trained to perform (Brocades-Zaalberg, 2005). These commanders had to figure out the appropriate working relationships and match mission needs with capabilities (Currey, 2003).…”

“…These commanders had to figure out the appropriate working relationships and match mission needs with capabilities (Currey, 2003). Overall civilmilitary cooperation depended too much on the personalities involved rather than on planning and standard operating procedures (Brocades-Zaalberg, 2005). As a consequence the efforts were person-dependent and many differences occurred within and between rotations and contingents.…”

Construction contracting and civil–military interaction

“…Given the prospect of increasing importance being attached to civil-military interaction (CMI) (Brocades Zaalberg, 2006;Wheeler and Harmer, 2006;Rietjens and Bollen, 2008) and the relevance of post-conflict reconstruction projects (Netherlands Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Defense and Economic Affairs, 2005;Lindley-French, 2007), the issue of contracting out such projects warrants closer attention. The literature on CMI also suggests that there are opportunities for improvements within the field of CMI projects (Rietjens, 2008b;Van der Gaag-Halbertsma et al ., 2008).…”