Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Hi all,
    Hope I've got the right place as it seems this forum is, quite understandably, mostly discussing other countries/conflicts but I wanted to see if anyone had any info on UNAMID or 'African Union – United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur'.

    I can't find much info on the UN part rather than the AU part. There's an interesting but very brief bit here: Irish troops to keep peace in Darfur for UN | World news | The Observer about Irish troop involvement. It seems to say what I expected was the case i.e. 'Western' military involvement is minimal and Ugandans, Rwandans etc. are providing most of the boots (do their militaries even have boots?) on the ground.

    I'm not here to debate whether or not 'Western' involvement should be more considerable but for the record I think it should and the fact that mostly corrupt/useless/undertrained/underequipped armies are attempting to end this generation's most horrific genocide is sad. I wouldn't have been so cynical a few years ago but I guess there are no resources and not a sufficient ex-colonial interest in the region for any militarily modern nations like the UK to involve themselves.

    Anyway, what I am here for is to ask if anyone can point me to any info about more powerful UN nations' military involvement in the conflict. I want to know if there are 'Western' boots on the ground (I don't keep typing 'Western' like that just to be annoying, it's because what I actually mean is what we'd recognise and militarily advanced nations whether in the west, Asia or Oceania). Specifically, are there British and/or Irish troops providing force protection/fighting the Janjaweed/getting stuck in? Or is the 'West's' contribution sadly token? (/training).
  2. Ah, thanks. Know of any news stories involving western troops?

    So looks like the only fully legit. militaries involved seem to be Germany and Republic of Korea (unless I am giving too little credit to the likes of Egypt). I've read that the Mongolian army isn't entirely sh*te, too.

    Any ideas about why the usual countries that fancy themselves as the world police (UK. USA etc.) haven't had deployments?I'd like to be shown a reason other than the only ones I can think of myself... which are the abovementioned lack of resources or feeling of obligation to wade in to former colonies. And why is it the likes of Pakistan and other LEDCs/NEDCs that seem to lend substantial military assitance to humanitarian causes? Is it as simple as their governments think it the right and humane thing to do and governments like ours are just more selfish and less interested? Or is there again a more cycnical reason such as less powerful UN players want to score 'points' with the UN?
  3. You're very deep. And militarist [as in rascist, sexist, ageist] there are many fine armies out there.......
  4. I know there are many fine men and women in many armies in many countries all over the world. And navies and air forces. I suppose I was being a little light hearted and maybe the serious forum isn't the place. Sorry about that. As brave and professional as you 'average' Malian soldier, for instance, might be though... he (or she?) doesn't benefit from the kind of equipment, training and support that his or her equivalent in the armed forces of a another, more developed country does.

    I wouldn't have thought the vastly different military capabilities of different countries was up for discussion, it's a fact. Nor the wide array of problems facing the militaries of less developed nations. Anyway, having said I'm a 'militarist', I don't think having a more powerful or capable makes a country or a government or a society and BETTER than another, just more useful to a peacekeeping mission. On the contrary, it seems that in this case it's not the countries most capable of defending civilians in war-torn regions that are doing so. I just think that's interesting and wonder why. I'm not trying to be disparaging about any nation or suggest that having a 'weaker' military than the likes of ours makes it any worse.
  5. The total size of the German contingent is 10 military personnel and RoK is 2 (in both cases chances are they are UNMOs and/or HQ staff.

    The level of participation of "western" countries is generally low.

    There are currently over 80,600 military personnel serving with 14 UN blue hatted/helmets missions around the world (there are other UN mandated missions as well eg ISAF in Afghanistan).

    As examples, the total UK participation is 283 personnel (of which 279 are serving with UNFICYP in Cyprus). There is a total of 28 US personnel serving on UN missions!!

    Western countries don't seem to contribute for a number of reasons:
    - they don't like putting their personnel under another countries command
    - lack of mission resources (this is part of the reason the missions resources are so bad)
    - lack of political will
    - the superpowers/colonial powers may have been part of the cause
    - ROE that they don't agree with


    These are the contributors ranked by contribution (including police) http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/contributors/2013/feb13_2.pdf

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
  6. Some countries use the UN system to get experience for their guys. The exponents of the system IIRC were the Irish, French and Canadians......
  7. Thanks very much irlsgt your responses have been great. Just what I was interested in.

    I suppose from what you've said, I've been under very much the wrong impression of the UN. I think I naively assumed that western countries were the big players in UN missions, contributing most of the personnel and 'firepower'. Seems I've been quite underinformed in that case!

    Athough I said I wouldn't get too much in to the morality of UNAMID, I might mention it briefly. I see it as a shame that western, powerful nations don't get more involved as, while I am completely of the old "jaw jaw is better than war war" philosophy, I think there is such a thing as a just conflict and it seems that most of the ones that could be described as closest to that mark gain some of the least participation by countries that could make the biggest differences.

    Thanks again for the info and comments.
  8. and yeah, I think I assumed that this might be one of the reason. I suppose some UN work looks good on the career-climbing officer's CV?

    Any ideas about why a less developed country might want to get significantly involved? Obviously the AU nations have a vested interest in what happens on their continent and to its people. It makes me wonder about countries like Pakistan though. Do you reckon that a large part of it is gaining operational experience and training? Or might they just see it as just and humane and have fewer of the reservations that a superpower would have such as those that you mentioned, irlsgt?
  9. I think the countries are quite clever really. Chaps gain experience, get fed and watered and clothed, country gets a subsidy for wages. Less of a bill all round..... Met Canadians with 4 or 5 of the little brown gongs, Irish the same and French. When in FRY was amazed to find our 2k commitment was totally swamped with about 24k French. One of their officers even kissed me when giving me a brown one. Anyway off back to the Daily Male with you eh....
  10. I detest the Daily Mail as much as the next man (should) but I'll try not feed the troll.
  11. Speak for yourself Saxon 2060; I like the Daily Mail and never miss the columns by Peter Hitchens et al. Granted it's not of the format of the Telegraph in that you can't wrap fish and chips up in it but still, I like it particularly the crossword.
  12. It is the UN Security Council that provide the mandate (this also provides the high level ROE). The 5 permanent members (US, UK, France, China & Russia). If one of them doesn't want a mission they can veto it, or if they suits them to have an ineffective mission they just ensure it has a poor mandate.

    How many of them will provide troops?

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)