Different ways of doing things, it leaves others to experiment

By Snake

In this United Nations mission,  it looks like  a rendezvous of all sorts.  The “East meets West.”  And the “North meets South.”  Such dichotomies implode into altruism but more often than not one thinks superior over another. 

Certainly, the  peculiarities  of  every contributing nation is something to consider. The same is true with the seriousness of interest that a participating nation posits and defends.  It can’t just be true that everyone has an equality of intentions though it may  be  prima facie similar. 

The meeting of  used to be dichotomies in this post-modern times is not unusual.  No system has yet an exclusive claim of an absolute application or operation  in the bid  of achieving  a perfect percentage of success in any working environment. It leaves no doubt to different approaches but sometimes becoming self-serving. 

In a far reaching report  of the Panel on the United Nations Peace Operations 2000 while  reverberating the Secretary General’s initiative to reach out,  people working in the system  have been reminded “to constantly keep in mind that the United Nations they serve is the universal organization. People everywhere are fully entitled to consider that it is their organization, and as such to pass judgment  on its activities and the people who serve in it.”(Italics supplied) 

In that same report, it says “[F]urthermore, wide disparities in staff quality exist and those in the system are the first to acknowledge it; better performers are given unreasonable workloads to compensate for those who are less capable. Unless the United Nations takes steps to become a true meritocracy, it will not be able to reverse the alarming trend of qualified personnel, the young among them in particular, leaving the Organization. Moreover, qualified people will have no incentive to join it. Unless managers at all levels, beginning with the Secretary-General and his senior staff, seriously address this problem on a priority basis, reward excellence and remove incompetence, additional resources will be wasted and lasting reform will become impossible.”  (Italics supplied) 

Paving the basis of  this discussion, now certain  observations are in order. 

There are peculiarities of the mission as there are  many troop contributing nations.  The employment of naked force at least receives a unison

understanding in the height of self-defense or self-preservation.  But in the applications of doctrines for one,  it  makes some areas of disagreement.  Two sides of the equation seem to disagree with all decency as to what is  in or not.

This is where the North learns from the South.  Sometimes people just may think that  security is maintained and sustained by the number of war machines and bold show of military muscle. In a low intensity conflict, the rats are hiding while the cat is there.  Can you now  imagine what’s going to happen when the cat is away? 

The establishment of a lasting solution to this rouge conflict for sure  is not how many rounds are fired, how  many mounted patrols are accomplished or how many men are deployed. The root  of  all evil  here is not its expediency but  the gradual acceptance of a reality  by  the same people whose only difference is by virtue of an accidental twist  on how their birth land can  be assured of prosperity.  It is  by the love of each camp of a nation to attain security and comfort  but only met headon  by   nationalist fervor on the one hand and  a fanatic illusion on the other hand. 

It  must be underlined  here that nothing can create a better solution  other than  a true sense of  reconciliation that by itself is the highest virtue of  Christianity,  of loving and forgiving. In the same manner that the principle of  peaceful co-existence and  unreserved accommodation  make-up the fabric of  this peacekeeping mission.  

In the conduct of peacekeeping operations, a long lasting legacy  where the center of gravity is the people themselves as its beneficiary. I mean people in general of East Timor to include those who had opted to lay down their arms  in order to face the new challenge of rebuilding  the same territory which  they too had fought for. 

The military component would not serve its purpose of maintaining a secure environment if the  people themselves remain ignorant of the true intention and  on the most probable outcome of all this UN energy.  The employment of conventional means therefore holds no water to contain  any hardcore fanatic of any “sanamagan”.  Rapid deployment in small tactics is most likely but can’t be sustainable to court the other side to a “win-win” situation. So that appeal to humanity  may  just  be  perfect  and  gives more meaning to any UN strategy. 

If there would be any win-win situation, there should be a true reconciliation. If in one way one dangles on them the carrot while at same time  prying on them with the stick then sincerity could never be achieved.  In any conflict situation, a resolution is underway when both groups can sit down (though this would not mean recognizing their belligerency status) and meet at the middle.  That is if a lasting solution is attainable.  In most countries, a total eradication of the conflict is not highly probable if and when those involved do not acquiesce  to any form of compromise.   

If this does not happen, it  is indispensable that East Timor will continue to be vigilant along its shared border with the West and would waste  enough of its energy patching-up any leak on the border even  after any United Nations cradle.  Boarder incursion is most likely not an uncommon  reality, a would be trial balloon to experiment on the rigidity of any  defense in-depth. 

Because there are no signs that  they may  be giving-in. “The War of the Flea” would be  a wasteful extravagance on the defender (East Timor).  It is a mindset that would be awaiting the right moment to seize  after  thinking that they are not forgiven.  What could be the most  reasonably acceptable formula to avert a conflict situation to drag on may be for years does not require a genius in us to ponder on.   

In a meeting held  in late February in Singapore among 20 intellectuals  led by David Malone, president of the New York-based International Peace Academy they are in agreement  and recognized that “Asia is one of the world’s biggest suppliers of troops to the UN’s peacekeeping efforts and the region should have a greater voice in deciding how operations are run,” The meeting which was organized by Simon Tay, chairman of Singapore Institute of International Affairs and an independent  Member of Parliament  who said the delegates agreed that the U.N. needed to improve peacekeeping efforts in Asia,  was held to debate on the a UN  Report in August last year recognizing the failure of peacekeeping in  Rwanda and Bosnia. 

Sometimes, it’s not worth watching too much “Rambo” movies.  It was a lesson in Vietnam.  Ideological conflicts separated North and South Korea. Cambodia had her own story.  Philippines has her  own. Malaysia  was and Indonesia is  again nursing her own.  Thailand had it too.  The crux of it all  is that a group of people  who may be drowned with any illusionary grandeur i.e. ideology,  cannot just be desiccated by any  “Inspector Gadget” or conventional mindset. It took years of fierce fighting but only to realize McGyver’s  dictum  that even what seems to be an impregnable fortress is not impregnable after all.  

The Paradox in the Bible between brothers Cain and Abel must find no place  in East Timor.  All Timorese has  a perfect common origin and who has all the  rights to enforce possession and ownership of this territory in rem ( enforceable against the whole world) but may  just  not have full enjoyment of it  by leaving others  their  usufruct  enjoyment.  Worst though should a conflict drags on, everything becomes res nulius ( property of no one).  

Even high walls along  the  border would not  engender security, unless the people would “kiss and make-up”  which must constitute the denouement leading to  a resolution as in a Shakespearean plot  of  “So much ado about Nothing.”

It’s an irony that with all these high-tech tiny  tweeny  witty,  communication is filled with  trash and not a single iota of understanding.  

N.B.: The author, an avowed Bosconian is a professor in Political and Social Sciences at the University of the Philippines (Clarkfield) and is  presently serving as a peacekeeper in his capacity as public information officer. (March 8, 2001)