Attachments
INTRODUCTION
In developing a concept on the Protection of Civilians (PoC), NATO should consider a cautionary approach, recognizing that the policy adopted by the Warsaw Summit emerges from decades of failure to protect civilians in conflict (NATO, 2016). These failures range from ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, genocide in Rwanda, civilian casualties in Afghanistan, security gaps in Libya, and the inability of the international community to protect civilians during the war in Syria.
The reasons for failure are well documented. Inadequate military planning to assess the nature of the threat, insufficient use of force to counter the threat, and a lack of political will to intervene in situations of violence are some of the reasons why protection efforts have failed. These failures have led to the evolution of international norms and standards on the conduct of war, the emergence of PoC as central to the mandate of UN peacekeeping missions, and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) framework. The need to develop more preventative frameworks is inherent in each of these approaches, recognizing that international action often comes too late in the conduct of hostilities to prevent large -scale violence. Even when the international community agrees to take action with the aim of ending a conflict, peace operations are often limited in political scope and financial resources.
This paper will explore what the international community has learned from such failures, and how NATO’s emerging concept on PoC might consider addressing these challenges. Recognizing that many protective actions carried out by NATO missions occurred after grave violations had already taken place, the role of NATO in conducting PoC functions during all phases of conflict including prevention, response, and rebuilding will be considered.
This paper will show how NATO action in Bosnia and Kosovo presents a broad range of PoC capabilities within NATO that offer early lessons learned (Kjeksrud, Ravndal, Stensland, de Coning & Lotze, 2016). Which is counter to the view of some scholars that NATO has only been concerned with protecting civilians in the context of the intervention in Libya, and in civilian casualty mitigation in Afghanistan. The paper will further address PoC challenges in Libya and Afghanistan, and comparative UN approaches.
This paper will also explore how the emerging NATO framework for PoC can address historic failures and current challenges. The proposed NATO concept consists of three PoC pillars; Mitigate Harm (MH), Contributing to a Safe and Secure Environment (C-SASE), and Facilitating Access to Basic Needs (FABN). Understanding the Human Environment (UHE) is an essential requirement for all pillars. Find a depiction of the emerging concept on the next page.
The ability of NATO to address PoC across the spectrum of the conflict will pose considerable challenges. While some NATO actions may be mandated to address a specific threat, failing to address broader PoC principles will lead to gaps in security, protection, and accountability. The paper offers suggestions for how NATO can fill these gaps by working with international partners.
In conclusion, this paper offers recommendations on what NATO can offer the international community to enhance its PoC capabilities. Given that NATO actions, like the UN, are subject to the political will of multinational decision-making bodies that may limit the scope of its mission, NATO should consider the following factors. First, NATO should consider its approach as evolutionary, taking steps toward the goal of protecting civilians while acknowledging that the policy will need to be reviewed and updated as NATO gains experience integrating PoC concepts more fully into its operations. Second, NATO should recognize the full range of protection tasks that are carried out by other agencies, and continue to emphasize its commitment to a comprehensive approach, which includes civil-military engagement. Third, NATO should focus its PoC efforts on documenting successes as well as failures, and track progress made on PoC implementation over time. By doing these things, NATO can ensure that its PoC policy will withstand the test of time and the changing dynamics of conflict intervention.