NationStates Jolt Archive

They finally made the decision to send EU troops (about 1,500) into the DRC to make sure the elections there go smoothly.

A worthwhile cause, I suppose. But the way it finally came to the decision, and the way the operation will now be conducted leaves a lot to be desired, IMHO.

As I understand it, there has been civil war in the Congo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War#The_course_of_the_war) for decades, and this now will be something of a landmark election. There are about 16,000 UN Peacekeepers there at the moment, but since the election promises to be something of a spectacle, both the DRC "Government" and the UN mission, MONUC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MONUC), have asked the EU for help.

It took ages and ages (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4781052.stm) for anything to be decided. But as it stands now, only about 450 troops will actually be deployed in Kinshasa (http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cmsUpload/060330-Congo_support_Monuc_en.pdf) (and pretty much none outside the city), and the rest will be "on standby" in neighbouring countries.

And Germany is taking command of the operation, which not everyone thinks is a good idea (http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1944083,00.html).

More links that sorta document the lead-up to the decision:
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,398470,00.html
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,404976,00.html
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,404959,00.html

So what do you think of the mission? Good idea, bad execution? Just a farce? Or a real step towards peace and stability in the DRC?

While I think its a noble thing to do, I think there is more than one reason why the EU is sending troops there.

It wants to look like its helping...look like it has the ability to send troops....and while I think its sort of a publicity stunt, I, at the same time praise them for helping out.

Aslo, NL.....I dont really understand why people think Germany is "biting off more than it can chew"...can you explain it to me?

It wants to look like its helping...look like it has the ability to send troops....and while I think its sort of a publicity stunt, I, at the same time praise them for helping out.

Wait. The EU is trying to look like it's helping and trying to look like it has the ability to send troops by helping and sending troops?

Wait. The EU is trying to look like it's helping and trying to look like it has the ability to send troops by helping and sending troops?

No...trying to involve itself more in world affairs and act more like a active force that has military power...instead of just an economic/political union.

And by doing this I think its just a little PR stunt to show they can and will.

Although I beleive its a good thing they're doing.

Let’s face it, good intentions and politics aside, I’d rather it was the EU on duty and not the African Union. Sure, most of the political instabilities in modern day Africa are the result of former European colonization, as well as more modern Cold War and corporate moves there to ruin the continent for personal power and gain back at home. Sure if the Belgians did today in the Congo what they once did, the Belgian royal family would be on trial for crimes against humanity at the Hague.

Still, the EU will provide much better security and monitoring than the African Union would be capable of. Too many AU nations have a hard time supplying and paying its troops properly, leading to unbelievable acts of corruption and grossly negligent actions that undermine the missions they are sent on. When Nigeria was involved in UN peacekeeping in former Yugoslavia they turned their base into an open gas bar for both sides and turned a peaceful zone into a hotspot, until they were literally driven out by Canadian peacekeepers. I knew someone who personally barely escaped charges of racism for pointing out the culture of criminality in the Nigerian army (especially since the second in charge of the mission at that time was Nigerian).

The EU would be more active in Africa, but African Union prefers to play politics when it comes to EU peacekeepers on African soil. Given the former colonial relationship that Africa had with Europe it’s not completely without reason. You could include today’s colonial relationships when you consider that it wasn’t long ago when Thatcher’s son tried to knock over a small African nation for the purposes of controlling it’s resources.

The Bruce

Aslo, NL.....I dont really understand why people think Germany is "biting off more than it can chew"...can you explain it to me?
Well, the dude is an Africa correspondent. So he would have seen and heard his share of the ugly reality on the ground.

In Germany, that sort of thing is completely foreign. I suppose his point is that with a parliament vigorously debating whether the official anti-Malaria drugs of the Bundeswehr might have some side-effects, or whether it would be okay for German troops to fire back at child soldiers, there might not be the bloody-mindedness necessary to deal with a situation like this.

Make of that what you will, but I think his better point is that the people in Congo speak French, and the German troops usually don't. And secondly, that any extension of the mission would have to be decided by the German parliament, which is notoriously slow and measured when it comes to deploying troops (and rightly so).

But then, Germany has had the command over the ISAF mission in Afghanistan for some time, and nothing went wrong.

The place is the size of Western Europe. 1,500 men to monitor elections? I wish them luck. :p

Well, the dude is an Africa correspondent. So he would have seen and heard his share of the ugly reality on the ground.

In Germany, that sort of thing is completely foreign. I suppose his point is that with a parliament vigorously debating whether the official anti-Malaria drugs of the Bundeswehr might have some side-effects, or whether it would be okay for German troops to fire back at child soldiers, there might not be the bloody-mindedness necessary to deal with a situation like this.

Make of that what you will, but I think his better point is that the people in Congo speak French, and the German troops usually don't. And secondly, that any extension of the mission would have to be decided by the German parliament, which is notoriously slow and measured when it comes to deploying troops (and rightly so).

But then, Germany has had the command over the ISAF mission in Afghanistan for some time, and nothing went wrong.

I understand.

Sort of related...I heard that Germany is training Iraqi police for us OUTSIDE of Iraq...is that true?

I understand.

Sort of related...I heard that Germany is training Iraqi police for us OUTSIDE of Iraq...is that true?
I wouldn't be surprised. The UK sent some senior Iraqi army officers to Sandhurst. As it did when Saddam Hussein was OK. :p

The place is the size of Western Europe. 1,500 men to monitor elections? I wish them luck. :p

17,500 men.

Sort of related...I heard that Germany is training Iraqi police for us OUTSIDE of Iraq...is that true?
Yep.
http://www.bundeswehr.de/portal/PA_1_0_LT/PortalFiles/C1256EF40036B05B/W267GG77777INFODE/041130_ausbild_07.jpg?yw_repository=youatweb
http://www.bundeswehr.de/portal/PA_1_0_LT/PortalFiles/C1256EF40036B05B/W267GGG7283INFODE/041130_ausbild_09.jpg?yw_repository=youatweb

If they live long enough to be recruited then it’s about the only practical way to train police, with the rebellion targeting anyone who joins the military or police. If you tried training them in Iraq you’d spend more time trying stay alive than training.
http://ghettobaby.net/Emoticons/linkedtocdixon061504changelinks/threadhijacked.gif

Well good luck over there. God's speed for the German soldaten who are risking life and limb. I hope it is worth it but somehow I doubt it.

When in doubt, open fire.

Well good luck over there. God's speed for the German soldaten who are risking life and limb.
To be fair, there will be plenty of other countries sending soldiers. Germany just got stuck with the leadership.

To be fair, there will be plenty of other countries sending soldiers. Germany just got stuck with the leadership.

Well if history tells us anything, German command is a good thing as long as the politicians stay out of it.

As my hero General Gerorge Patton once said: "I'd rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." :D

But I still say God's speed and come home safe.

Off to the jungle.
Perhaps there'll be a bungle?

*Bump*

Also, it doesn't look like Britain will come and play. Ireland might though.

http://euobserver.com/9/21204
Seven of the 25 EU countries have indicated that they will join the mission. These are Germany, France, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Austria.

Britain will help with the planning but would not provide troops said British defence Secretary John Reid, because of its commitments in Afghanistan and Iraq.

*Bump*

Also, it doesn't look like Britain will come and play. Ireland might though.


Yay! Although thats odd. Normally Ireland doesn't like getting involved in military activity if it's not UN. Good turnaround. Given the memories of serving in the Congo, I wonder will many opt to go....

So what do you think of the mission? Good idea, bad execution? Just a farce? Or a real step towards peace and stability in the DRC?

Another farce.

*Bump*

Also, it doesn't look like Britain will come and play. Ireland might though.

*Waves little Irish flag*

Yay! Although thats odd. Normally Ireland doesn't like getting involved in military activity if it's not UN. Good turnaround. Given the memories of serving in the Congo, I wonder will many opt to go....
Hopefully this can be used as a precedent for getting around that silly triple-lock.

Another farce.
Care to elaborate?