|
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Overview
Australians have been serving with distinction in
peacekeeping operations since 1947. But greater demands are being placed on
them. The main message contained in Part I of this report is that
peacekeeping operations have become increasingly complex and multidimensional
and that today's peacekeepers face new challenges. Against this background, the
committee considers Australia's engagement in peacekeeping.
In Part II of the report, the committee identifies the main
criteria against which Australian decision makers should assess whether or not
to commit to a peacekeeping operation. The committee is of the view that the
Australian Government should be satisfied that the mission's mandate has:
- clearly identifiable and achievable objectives;
- adequate resources and level of commitment to meet these
objectives;
- proper legal underpinnings;
- force protection that matches the needs on the ground; and
The committee accepts
that in the real world compromises are reached in order to achieve an agreement
on the nature and composition of an operation which may then produce a mandate that
does not fully satisfy the criteria. Even so, the committee is of the view that,
where Australia is taking a key or lead role in the proposed mission, the government
should ensure that the terms of the mandate are consistent with the above
criteria.
In particular, the committee
underlines the importance of Australia having an exit strategy. The committee,
however, is not convinced that government agencies fully grasp the meaning of
exit strategy—that specifying an end date or end state for withdrawal is not of
itself an exit strategy. The committee argues that an exit strategy:
- provides a roadmap—a structured plan for achieving the stated
objective; and
- contains milestones or benchmarks against which progress toward
the objectives can be measured—the benchmarks go beyond what is termed
'technical achievements' such as an election or number of homes restored but take
cognizance of, and mark progress toward, the ultimate goal of sustainable
peace.
An exit strategy is an
important evaluation and accountability tool which is the major concern of Part
VI of the report.
Parts III and IV of the report focus on the effectiveness of
the whole-of-government, whole-of-nation approach to Australia's participation
in peacekeeping. The committee finds that there is much scope to improve the
preparation arrangements for Australian peacekeepers across the government and
non-government sectors. In particular, the report emphasises the importance of
interoperability at all levels and between all elements of an operation. It
suggests that better planning, communication, training and joint exercises, and
collaboration in developing shared doctrine would help to improve coordination
between all participants, including partner countries, in a peacekeeping
operation.
In Part V of the
report, the committee's main concern relates to the accessibility of data on
the health of Australian peacekeepers, inadequacies in the ADF's health records
management and post-deployment care of peacekeepers with mental health
problems. The report makes a number of recommendations to rectify identified
deficiencies.
Part VI of the report
notes that:
- government agencies and the government as a whole do not have
effective processes for converting lessons from a peacekeeping operation into
policy or practice—due in large measure to inadequate evaluation mechanisms,
particularly the absence of effective performance indicators;
- current reporting practices can be improved to provide greater
transparency and accountability—indeed the fragmentary reporting on Australia's
engagement in peacekeeping provides an incomplete account of these activities;
- there is a compelling argument for a white paper on Australia's
engagement in peacekeeping; and
- considerable scope exists to make the Asia–Pacific Centre on Civil–Military
Cooperation an internationally recognised institute and for it to have an
integral role in developing a culture of learning and improvement in those
involved in peacekeeping.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 26 August 2008 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
