Untold
effects and
the local viability of peace-keeping
PressInfo #
162
September
27, 2002
By
Vasiliki
Neofotistos
TFF Peace Antenna and PhD candidate at Harvard
University
and
Jan
Oberg,
TFF director
Peacekeeping operations, PKOs, have direct aims,
mandates and consequences directed towards the
de-escalation of conflict and the maintenance of peace.
Such aims are usually analysed in research reports and
discussed in the media. But there are also more or less
intended, indirect or hidden objectives and consequences
of PKOs which are seldom highlighted.
More specifically, peacekeepers are transferred from a
number of UN member states to the troubled area. They
bring along values, norms, habits and ways of doing and
organising things. In the best of cases, their training
before departure creates some awareness among personnel
about this type of "luggage" and how it may differ from
the local values, norms, and habits in the region of
operations. But, invariably, they can have a tremendous
impact on local society and culture.
The ways in which local people negotiate the social
encounter with peacekeeping forces - a social process
that brings to mind colonial and missionary encounters -
are crucial for us to understand the viability of
peace-keeping operations on the ground. It helps us also
to understand the relations between peace-keepers and
locals as well as the relations among different,
newly-emergent fractions of the local population.
Unfortunately, media tend to leave and stay away when the
fighting dies down; that's, however, when they should
stay engaged if they were interested in peace rather than
war.
The situation in a place like today's Kosovo/a - a
good three years after the NATO-UN peacekeepers arrived
makes a good case for discussing such questions. Some,
predominantly Albanians, see the bombings and the
international government missions and policies as a
liberation. Others, predominantly the Serb minority, see
it as an occupation and as an endorsement of reverse
ethnic cleansing. Although this mission was and remains
highly controversial, we use Kosovo/a is here as an
example. But in principle the mechanisms we deal with are
at work in other conflict-areas too.
For, just like in any other social context where the
presence of peacekeeping forces becomes central to the
experience of local life, people in Kosovo/a welcomed the
UN arrival both with great relief and even greater
scepticism. We shall begin by turning our attention to
some of the effects of PKOs on social life, while aiming
to shed light on the long-term viability of
peace-keeping, as it now stands, in Kosovo/a.
Urban landscape, consumption and
lifestyle
Before the NATO bombing campaign against Yugoslavia in
1999, Kosovo's main town, Pristina, used to be a
conglomeration of Communist-era concrete mass buildings
interspersed with a few spaceship-like public buildings
that all fused together to generate a dull concept of
aesthetics. After the bombing, however, changes in the
urban landscape are striking, concomitant with the
presence of tens of thousands of peacekeepers of
different ranks and tens of thousands of civilians from
governmental as well as non-governmental organisations
that have been operating in the province since 1999. The
imposing building where the local Serbian authorities
were once located now hosts the UN Headquarters to mark a
paradigm shift in the exercise of local power. Perhaps
the most noticeable change for the newcomer, however, is
the exorbitant number of white UN and OSCE cars crammed
together with red police ones - the so-called "Coca-Cola"
cars - in the narrow streets of Pristina.
At the aftermath of the bombing, a local economy of
the idealisation of UCK (Ushtria Clirimtare e Kosoves) or
the Liberation Army of Kosovo, KLA, proliferates. Street
vendors, for example, selling an array of flags, pins and
T-shirts with the UCK emblem printed on them are aligned
one next to the other near the main square. Piles of
Albanian books written by UCK commanders and published in
Tirana, advocating for the Army's deeds and ideals, fill
up numerous stalls. Kosovo-Albanian flags and emblems are
on display together with those of the European Union,
NATO and the United States.
The flow of money from abroad, in the form of salaries
for the local personnel who has managed to join the work
force of international organisations as drivers, clerks
and translators cannot alleviate the severe economic
crisis that has stricken Kosovo for a decade or more in
times of peace as well as war. At the same time, the
overwhelming international presence in the area has
generated a deep social and economic rift between those
locals who have the skills to find employment with
international organisations and those who do not.
Nowhere does this gap become more apparent than in the
clientele of the ever-expanding number of fancy
cafés and restaurants that appear out of nowhere
and in no time, with elegant interiors and excellent
food. Customers are those locals who can afford the
prices, together with the "international community's
staff members" who are equally, if not more, important in
boosting demand. It is not uncommon to see large queues
outside restaurants during lunch and dinner time. There
is nothing original in the food or the environment
(except perhaps in the prices); it's all "European" and
"American". (And) Besides, what else can you spend money
on in this artificial town but food, beer, drinks and
perhaps going on weekend trips to the mountains or
sea-coast in Montenegro (not to mention
prostitution)?
At the same time, a newly emergent class of local
people consists of those who have earned a fortune on the
war be it on drugs, weapons, smuggling, transport or
plain trading in goods needed for the re-building and for
the expanded consumption by the internationals. In
addition, the Mafia still remains one of the key problems
in today's Kosovo/a. It's a well-known fact that you can
hardly buy anything, even a beer, there without
supporting its operations. As we were told, the Mafia is
so potent that its members, Serbs and Albanians alike,
often extract money from local people by means of
threatening. The sudden arrival of a big number of
foreigners and the overwhelming international presence in
Kosovo/a has upset prior social networks of trust and
security in a closed society where everyone used to know
the origin and the whereabouts of everyone else.
There are dozens of discotheques and cafés in
Pristina. Among the ones that attract the biggest number
of patrons are the restaurant, bars and outdoor
facilities of the famous Grand Hotel where, during the
earlier Balkan wars, Arkan and his Tigers used to have
their backroom recruitment offices. Now some foreign
investors have come around to renovate it. That's not too
bad, of course. Visitors in the early 1990s may still
remember the cold winter nights without heating, without
electricity (and lift) stumbling up pitch dark stair and
corridors, luggage in one hand and candle lights in the
other. Soon it will resemble any other Western hotel
around the world. There is a demand for that in today's
Kosovo/a. As long, that is, as there are this many
foreigners in this tiny province which has, still, very
little productive or self-sustaining economic
activity.
Politics and
democracy
Few local politicians have had the slightest idea of
what it means to lead a society; they all came from the
rather narrow political tradition in which it was enough
to call for "Independence" and denounce whatever was done
by Serbs, even good-hearted ones. What did politics ever
have to do with sewage systems, house-building, taxation,
garbage handling, traffic, law and order? These were
issues of no relevance to the citizens, or so they
thought.
The only exception, to some extent, was the Democratic
League of Kosova, LDK, which built alternative political,
educational and health institutions, indeed the embryos
of a genuine civil society. LDK's work was unwisely
ignored, however, by the international community in two
ways: Western governments chose to support the hard-line
militants (designated terrorists by the U.S. State
Department at the time). Those were people who did not
know much else but how to handle a gun and certainly did
not have a clue about democracy. Secondly, the
international community came in 1999 and built everything
from scratch, seemingly not even aware of the fact that
there was a civil society in-the-making by means of
non-violence and a commitment to build a new civil
society. Such a society existed due to the moderate LDK
led by Dr. Ibrahim Rugova, the democratically elected
leader from the early 1990s and current president of
Kosovo/a (much to the surprise of the international
community that did its utmost to undermine him).
It was the only non-violent leadership and politics in
the former Yugoslavia together with Kiro Gligorov's
Macedonia, another peace-oriented society demolished by
the international community. Thus democracy was imposed
from the outside - which means it is not, and will not
be, a democracy more than it will in say Muqdishu,
Sarajevo or Kabul. It's an "as if"-democracy with no
roots on the local ground with frustrated citizens
feeling that they have little or no stake(s): neither in
the peace plan on which it all operates nor in the
particular development of their society that emerges out
of the long-term implementation phase.
For, the remaining few Serbs are now the ones faced
with the precarious situation of isolation and physical
danger, to the extent that they need international escort
to exit their buildings even to buy daily necessities,
such as bread and milk or have their children reach
school safely.
Most Kosovo-Albanians on the other hand see
international presence as yet another impediment to
personal freedom and Kosovo' s independence that has also
enhanced social instability and uncertainty for the
future.
And the rest of us must not forget that it is their
society, not ours. They must live there with the
consequences of their own actions as well as those of the
international community. The international community can
always leave. It simply doesn't feel right.
Militarism and technological
fixes
What are we teaching children and youth in these
conflict zones with our bombs and about 40,000 soldiers?
Surely that bombs, boots, barracks and bayonets is what
really matters and shapes the future. Patient
negotiations, active listening to the locals and the
locals listening to each other is out, and so is
political sophistication. Peace must be brought about by
violent, not peaceful -- as stated in the UN Charter--
means.
In are armed people in battle and camouflage dress,
streets lined with armoured personnel carriers, Humwees,
barracks and the largest US base, Bondsteel, built
outside the US since the Vietnam war. We tell them that
they, not civilians, get thing done! They created peace
while diplomats (allegedly) failed. The tacit message
sent by the international organisations is that the fist
is better than the spoken word. That there are
technological fixes to social and political problems, to
traumas, economic crises and all other root causes of war
and hatred. To be big and strong, militant and macho is
better than what they had - and could have had. In short,
that leadership is out and talking tough with high-tech
is in.
The young boys therefore who were told by their
fathers and grandfathers many years ago that independence
would be won with war see that theory confirmed. They
become prepared to reply to a potential call to arms in
the future - will join a future Kosovo army, if there is
one - and later run the place according to the norms of
the barrack rather than those of the parliament.
It is no wonder that it takes time to develop genuine
democracy beyond merely free (and sometimes fraud)
elections in places like Kosovo. The international
community is present through undemocratic procedures in
the first place; it entered the conflict zone through
trading arms to one of the parties while shamelessly
bombing the other, and then it tries to teach and impose
democracy top-down. It is not unreasonable to see the
international community as occupiers of a province that,
beyond dispute, is part of Yugoslavia at least until a
negotiated solution stating otherwise is found. In short,
there is no relation between means and ends, between what
we say and what we do. And this problem has become much
worse with the change from unarmed peace-keeping to
heavily armed peace-enforcement.
Local obedience and lessons
learned
Implicitly we tell the local parties that they are
subordinate and must obey foreign masters. We tell them
that they were irresponsible, did not know better than to
fight each other and that, the "good West" came riding in
with the sole, noble purpose of creating peace and being
impartial. The "good West" teaches them that they should
be grateful for the fact that we installed a new regime,
introduced democracy, law and order and that the World
Bank and the Fund came in with capital. And if they
behave, the doors to paradise will open: NATO and EU
membership, integration in the "Euro-Atlantic" community
is the reward out there somewhere. If they don't, the
doors to paradise will be slammed and the flow of aid
discontinued. But they are told by hand-wringing Western
diplomats that they can pursue that option too, of course
- and pay another kind of price: oblivion, decrepit
living standards or new war.
Whether the "good West" or the local communities will
have paid the highest price in, say, twenty years is of
no importance now. Because, the former appears to be
interested in "quick fixes" while the latter actually are
offered no choice! That's where Macedonia is today: no
choice. It has to implement the "peace" plan the EU, the
US and NATO imposed on it (de facto) last year. Of course
one might argue that had the West not done so, Macedonia
would have rolled down the abyss of civil war. Such an
argument, however, foreshadows the instrumental role that
the West itself played in unravelling the warfare, be it
with its lack of co-ordinated action that ended up doing
more harm than good, its disregard for local needs and
its pumping in weapons, military experts and intelligence
people. In any case, Western "intervention" in the
Balkans ends up leaving a large part of the population
with humiliation and an even larger one with the belief
in violence as the only means to accomplish ends.
Social norms and aspirations
- a young woman speaks her mind
Over the years, the authors have talked with many
locals both in Kosovo and Macedonia. What follows are
excerpts from a conversation we had about a year ago with
Lindita, an Albanian woman in her mid-twenties who worked
as an interpreter for one of the international
governmental organisations in Pristina. Lindita's
comments echo similar comments we often heard voiced in
Kosovo. Here are some highlights of what she had to
say.
There is less equality
now:
- "So many have gotten rich so fast and then you have
all those who do not have anything, still. I don't know
how they got so rich. But it was more equal here before
and there is much less solidarity among Albanians now.
Values such as solidarity and equality are rapidly
declining; in the countryside there are fewer changes,
but I can hardly recognise Pristina; it's about twice as
big as it was a couple of years ago. So many changes and
too quickly. We need changes, but this is too fast. It's
like a Coke bottle exploding!"
Increasing generation gap and
changed power relations in the family:
- "My parents think of what will happen with people
here, with our values. People speak English, girls dress
up in mini skirts and expose their bare bellies and I
come home and speak even some English. My father gets
irritated by this and tells me to use our Albanian
language. Perhaps these are good changes. Younger people
earn money and become more independent, and they obey the
old generation less than before. A young woman who brings
home a lot of money every month to the household, like I
do, can say to her father that if you don't like me and
the way I live, I can leave."
European values, positive and
negative responses:
- "As for Europe, we wanted to get in there but it is
now here! The young generation is mostly fascinated by
the contacts with the internationals and the idea of a
future in Europe. But the older generation doesn't like
it at all."
Cultural norms and concepts
erode:
- "We Albanians have the concept of besa,
honour. But this has become more difficult now, although
some still apply it. It's an old, very special concept,
or custom, in our culture but we hardly talk about it
anymore. Up to the bombing it was more important. We
ordinary people may not lose it completely but I fear we
may in the future. And at the higher political level, we
can forget about besa. In politics, it seems to
me, it is money that does the trick, not honour."
Feeling less secure than
before:
- "I must admit that I feel much less secure than
before. I do not go out that much. There are so many new
faces whereas I knew everybody before. Pristina is too
small to host so many different backgrounds. You see, the
borders are open, everything goes through, there is
trafficking of women, drugs and all that. And I don't
mean only the internationals. All kinds of Albanians have
come in because there is business here."
Less time for each other,
more entertainment:
- "Like everybody else I spend a lot of my spare time
with friends and family drinking tea and chatting, of
course. That's tradition. But families meet less often
now, I think. The reason is that everybody is now busier
with their own affairs: shopping - even abroad and on a
Visa card! &endash; there are so many new rules and
things happening and there are new employment
opportunities. Life is more hectic. It seems like
everybody has less time for each other nowadays. We must
all cope with change, very rapid and too much change. But
we still watch TV a lot, for sure, and talk about our
bosses (Lindita laughs)."
Individualism versus
collectivism - and consumerism:
- "I need our traditions, our wedding ceremonies and
family gatherings. The internationals seem to be so
independent, and live here one by one, without family. We
are not independent like them, we think more like "us"
while they think of "I". I don't want to lose this
feeling of "us" for anything in the world. Many can now
go shopping even abroad, but have you seen all the
expensive fashion shops here in Pristina, they are scary!
Look, I am employed by a major international organisation
and get about 600 Euros, but even I can't spend that much
money on clothes and things (Lindita meantime
chain-smokes while her fancy sun-glasses are carefully
placed next to her pack of Davidoff cigarettes on the
table). If they leave, I'll get 1/4 of that in the best
of cases, I mean if I would get a job at all. This new
consumerism is not healthy."
Education is out of the
question, at least for now:
- "When I met my friends before we typically asked:
what do you study? Nobody asks that anymore, instead we
ask: which organisation do you work for and how much do
you earn? Of course I learn a lot I would otherwise not
have learnt, but the price I am paying is real education.
And when one day it's all over, what will we have left,
except material things?
Changing social structures,
go between, transition:
- "I have changed my status completely because I am no
longer seen as an equal by my friends who do not have a
job with one of the many international organisations.
They see me as someone who is slightly more high-class,
detached and lucky; they kind of see people like me as
almost internationals! On the other hand, the
internationals see me as a local, as someone who is
subordinate and must work and do exactly as they tell me
to or tacitly expect. Look, we do not even get a business
card like those higher up in the organisation. We are
just called "general service staff" while the
internationals are called the "professionals". I am only
an interpreter, but at the same time they could not talk
with each other and the locals without people like
me."
Anyhow
- "I am not saying that all this is bad. When we were
in former Yugoslavia, we Albanians could get killed any
day and we did not have a chance to get any education.
Now at least there is hope for something better."
Lindita finally told us that she would always feel
that her roots were in Kosovo and that that was her
country, no matter what. She would not leave it for any
other reason except if her partner was a foreigner. About
half a year after our conversation took place, she had
already moved to an EU country.
What we learn from her is how deep and broad, how
conflictual and problematic it is to be the local
embodied objective of huge international operations that
try to create and maintain peace or rather, as in the
case of Kosovo/a at least, run a protectorate. Whether
intended or not, PKOs leave their mark, unavoidably.
Local people hang in the balance in-between as remnants
of a past that proved to be impossible and potential
agents of a future not quite yet plotted. In addition,
many carry the sorrow, the pain and, perhaps, the wish
for revenge that such in-between states can generate
among fractions of the local population.
Moreover, this young Albanian woman points to a series
of essential aspects of civil society development in
post-war regions. She belongs to the side that is most
happy that the international organisations came to
Kosovo/a, she is by no means negative to the fact that
NATO, the UN, OSCE and hundreds of NGOs are present in
her community. But her words, we understand, reveal a
considerable feeling of insecurity and powerlessness
vis-à-vis the unspoken consequences of these
missions and their long-term social, cultural and
economic impact.
What can happen if the
peace-keepers stay?
Even though things have calmed down in the province,
one cannot afford to overlook the increasing number of
incidents directed against members of the international
community. Such incidents are indicative of the growing
discontent with the international presence, as it now
stands, and point to ways that locals envision their
future - a future that surely does not involve
internationals that dominate or run affairs according to
foreign interests.
The viability of the top-down imposed Western system
of getting things done in Kosovo/a seems to be contingent
on the locals' long-term co-optation by the idea that
Serbs and Albanians are indeed better off with foreigners
taking matters in their hands. Alternatively, perhaps it
would be no exaggeration to note that yet another
conflict is in the making in Kosovo/a, this time between
internationals and locals, or even between locals who
espouse Western ideals for self-serving purposes and
those who do not.
What can happen when the
peacekeepers leave?
Imagine that many or all of these tens of thousands
foreigners suddenly left Kosovo/a (some actually might if
or when Iraq is invaded). The impact they have on the
local market, their profile as comparatively rich
consumers is considerable in this under-developed
province. Add to that all the technical and other
services the PKOs need as well as the construction and
infrastructure development, which are parts of
peace-building processes.
Then imagine that one day it is all over. Is there any
self-reliant capacity in this project, in the place
called Kosovo/a? How many thousands would lose the jobs
they took, knowing well that it meant that they abandoned
further education for years? What about those who, due to
the salaries they got, acquired a higher status but will
fall down the social and economic ladder in unemployment
if the missions leave? What about those who have bought
property or made investment because they suddenly had a
high income - and then lose it?
We know that there is no ideal political exit strategy
from many of these places: Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan.
But, even worse perhaps, there is no economic and
cultural exit strategy at all. Stay and you will, sooner
or later not only affect but also manage (or uproot) the
local economy and culture; leave and whatever it is that
was dependent on international presence to run smoothly
is bound to fall apart.
This is a central dilemma in all PKOs. Creative and
fair ways out cannot be expected unless we devote MUCH
more attention to it. And debate it!
Raising
questions
Some may see the cultural and economic impact of PKOs
as a natural part of the current trend of "globalisation"
and argue that change would anyhow have come to these
troubled lands and that it is at least better now than
had the wars been allowed to continue. But that is no
satisfying answer. Instead, we need an open discussion
about a series of question, among them:
- Is this a new kind of colonialism and cultural
management through which local societies are opened up
and "programmed" for Westernisation and for serving our
interests rather than their own indigenous development
goals and needs?
- Can genuine peace be expected when we employ
culturally blind and violent means?
- Can democracy be promoted in the way the West
professes to do in, say, Kosovo/a?
- How can respect for human rights be promoted when
the international missions unavoidably ignore the rights
of people to participation and equality?
- Does the way that PKOs are internally organised
generate hierarchical divisions between locals and
internationals that are hard to bridge?
- Can we imagine peacekeeping with a better balance
between the locals and the internationals, between means
and ends and between words and ideals on the one hand and
actual operations on the other?
- Can more be done to promote gender balance and
involve women and youth while at the same time be
respectful of a local culture where gender equality is
not on the agenda?
- Could the locals come to us whenever they deem our
help necessary instead of our inviting ourselves
over?
- Should some kind of social and economic and cultural
impact statements be made for each PKO so that many more
people would be alerted to the untold consequences of
these missions?
- Are we willing to share responsibilities with the
local civil societies and stay on for the time it takes
to make real democratic changes and the post-war
developments?
- Could there be much more mutual learning instead of
one-way instruction?
- Should there be advance planning for gradual
disengagement from local affairs and the transfer of
responsibility to locals?
- Can we make those changes sustainable and
self-reliant, so we can leave with a good feeling and not
with a feeling of having brought more chaos down on
war-stricken people and their societies, tail between our
legs?
© TFF 2002
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
You are welcome to
reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but
please retain the source.
Would
you - or a friend - like to receive TFF PressInfo by
email?
|