On 9 October 2013, Transparency International (TI) launched a report, Corruption and Peacekeeping: Strengthening Peacekeeping and the United Nations, stating that corruption undermines the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations. The report calls for systems to be put in place in order to curb corruption, as well as for focused debates inside and outside of the UN to be had in order to strengthen peacekeeping operations.⁽²⁾

“There is sense among peacekeeping and foreign policy professionals that – because corruption is difficult – it is better to adapt and to cope with it than to recognize it more formally and address it,” according to the report.⁽³⁾ This paper looks at why this is a “difficult” topic and what discussions can be had to possibly strengthen peace processes in Africa.

Transparency International’s report and the UN’s response

According to the TI report on corruption and peacekeeping, corruption can be both a cause and a consequence of conflict.⁽⁴⁾ Excesses within ruling regimes may ignite conflict and revolutions. Corruption can also destroy institutions (often already weakened) during and after conflict, as well as lead to the integrity of states to be questioned. Furthermore, as money flows in during post-conflict periods, networks of organised crime and corrupt factions fuel the further destruction of these weak institutions.⁽⁵⁾ Peacekeeping forces and peacebuilding actors are often left trying to balance various goals and objectives, whilst working with local actors who are involved with corrupt activities to attain sustainable peace. In addition, various reports point out that corruption within peacekeeping forces further contributes to the limiting effect of corruption on the impact of peacekeeping missions.⁽⁶⁾

The TI report notes that peacekeeping training on how to deal with corruption is almost non- existent. The United Nations (UN) also has no general policy pertaining to corruption, peace mandates rarely mention corruption and if corruption enjoys attention (such as in the DPKO-OROLSI ⁽⁷⁾ Planning Toolkit for Peacekeeping Missions), it is often mentioned as an afterthought or general caution.⁽⁸⁾ The TI report then concludes with recommendations on how to address these issues, notably through targeted policies, guidance for peacekeepers and focused training of peacekeeping staff.⁽⁹⁾

Following the launch of the report, the spokesperson of the UN, Farhan Haq, stated that the UN departments “take all such observations very seriously and are ready to consider how they can reinforce the integrity of our systems.”⁽¹⁰⁾ At the same time, Mr Haq questioned the research methodology of the TI report, and asserted that the report tries to cover such a broad array of issues related to the subject of corruption that some parts of the report are marked by “superficial analysis and findings.” He also stated that the report does not “provide much substance or sense of scale o[f] the risk.”⁽¹¹⁾ Regardless of these criticisms, the TI report raises a few important questions.

Corruption and conflict

Discussions, reports and debates pertaining to corruption and conflict are not new. Corruption has been “identified as a major obstacle to success” ⁽¹²⁾ in peacebuilding processes as well as for peacekeeping operations. In this regard, many practical questions on how to eliminate corruption and the impact of corruption on peace have been raised, whilst conceptual problems on the definition of corruption and the understanding of its role in contexts of unstable political environments have yet to be fully explored.⁽¹³⁾

Allegations of corruption activities enacted by UN peacekeepers working in African conflicts have been plentiful. Reports have examined disclosures of corruption (particularly illicit diamond mining) on the part of the Nigerian element of the peacekeeping force in Sierra Leone in the year 2000,⁽¹⁴⁾ charges related to bribing by procurement officers working in Congo,⁽¹⁵⁾ and allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse (particularly of children) by UN peacekeepers in Liberia.⁽¹⁶⁾ These reports have also stated that UN peacekeeping troops in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) smuggled gold and ivory, as well as offered arms to militias in 2008,⁽¹⁷⁾ whilst allegations of corrupt activities of UN peacekeepers presently working in Mali at have also been made.⁽¹⁸⁾

These cases were reported after reforms made by the UN following reports of rampant corruption in Cambodia, Somalia and the Balkans during the 1990s. The UN created the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) in 1994 in response to allegations of mismanagement. However, the body has a poor record of holding corrupt officials to account.⁽¹⁹⁾ As the TI report stated, more measures are needed to grapple with the impact of corruption on the success of peacekeeping. Peacekeepers particularly need guidance on how to handle and identify corruption in various contexts, and peacekeepers need to be held accountable for their behaviour.⁽²⁰⁾

The understanding of what corruption means in a conflict-affected community is crucial for successful peace processes. TI defines corruption as being “the abuse of entrusted authority (public or private) for illegitimate (private or group) gain.”⁽²¹⁾ However, the definition fails to distinguish between corruption and theft or misappropriation.⁽²²⁾ Furthermore, a comprehensive definition of corruption will allow for an objective understanding (to ensure a universal element), as well as for the recognition of local and cultural standards.⁽²³⁾

Political order and the systems of norms and values associated with political order break down during war.⁽²⁴⁾ Peacebuilding (and peacekeeping) thus take place in situations where political order and its associated norms are not present, or are weak or contested. Civilians may also distrust officials, as well as lack trust in or lack a thorough understanding of a legitimate political order (and its associated standards). The understanding of corruption by the people in such conditions may differ from the understanding of corruption of peacebuilders. Peacebuilders have to develop and enforce standards for public offices as part of a process of establishing necessary levels of consensus and foster commitment for a vision, while the people may foster various different ideas of political order and its associated standards.⁽²⁵⁾ In other words, international peacebuilders and local nationals can have vastly different perceptions of corruption, which can make building consensus among international and local people during peacebuidling process even more difficult.⁽²⁶⁾

A related issue is that the success of peacekeeping depends on state institutions that function properly. However, many of the most difficult conflicts of the world take place in countries where such institutions are of secondary importance to patronage networks and social affinities. Civilians may still care about political issues, but they struggle to organise political allegiances or resolve political differences through state institutions – often due to a lack of the rule of law. Political life in such a country is often regulated more by socio-culturally determined rules,⁽²⁷⁾ rather than the assumed state of affairs and political life on which peacekeeping principals are built – bringing about misunderstandings and less effective peacekeeping.

Finally, corruption holds several possible consequences in and for conflict-affected countries. Corruption during war can serve to prolong wars through unlawful enrichment during conflict, and corruption undermining the morale of armed forces, particularly government forces.⁽²⁸⁾ Corruption in post-conflict situations can heighten the risk for renewed conflict; entrench imbalances of political power inherited from the conflict; bring about mismanagement of post-conflict reconstruction, which may lead to social unrest and delegitimise local governments; facilitate criminal activities in post-conflict environments; entrench inequalities; and bring about the fiscal mismanagement.⁽²⁹⁾

However, corruption might also serve to secure some degree of political, economic and social stability – functioning as glue for societies where state and societal institutions are often weakened by conflict.⁽³⁰⁾ If this particular function of corruption in conflict-affected countries is disrupted, adverse effects may also ensue – making it questionable whether combating corruption without a deeper contextual understanding of its space in post-conflict societies is, in the long-term, a viable solution to transform conflict. For such an understanding, peacekeepers and peacebuilders need guidance and training to assist them in dealing with and understanding the various levels, types, functions and spaces of corruption in various contexts.

Concluding remarks

TI’s report on corruption and peacekeeping calls for discussions and debates on the impact of corruption on the success of peacekeeping. It also proposes that through the right training, guidance, policies and accountability measures, the corrosive effects of corruption on peacekeeping operations can be limited. Measures have been taken by the UN to address the concern of corrupt peacekeeping (particularly by the creation of the IOSO in 1994), but the concern remains – thus calling for further measures for accountability.

Furthermore, particularly in the African context of conflict-affected countries, a few questions arise. Not only does corruption adversely affect the rebuilding of countries and prolong conflict, but it also serves as a short-term solution for a conflict situation to buy in ‘peace-spoilers’, as well as serves to bring some stability to a conflict-affected society. In addition, the term ‘corruption’ means different things for different people – often making peacebuilding operations difficult when state institutions are weak.

In order to grapple with these complexities, peacekeepers and peacebuilders should be made more aware of the realities of corruption and be trained to understand the difficulties surrounding the concept in conflict-affected areas in order to become more effective in bringing about sustainable peace.

Written by Elnari Potgieter ⁽¹⁾

NOTES:

(1) Elnari Potgieter is a Research Associate with CAI. Contact Elnari through Consultancy Africa Intelligence's Conflict and Terrorism unit ( conflict.terrorism@consultancyafrica.com). Edited by Nicky Berg.
(2) ‘Corruption and peacekeeping: Strengthening peacekeeping and the United Nations’, Transparency International UK, 9 October 2013, http://www.transparency.org.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
(5) Ibid.
(6) Ibid.
(7) The Department of Peacekeeping Operations, Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions.
(8) Ibid.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Gladstone, R., ‘U.N. questions criticism of its peacekeepers’, The New York Times, 10 October 2013, http://www.nytimes.com.
(11) Ibid.
(12) Philip, M., 2008. Peacebuilding and corruption. International Peacekeeping, 15(3), pp. 310-327.
(13) Ibid.
(14) MacAskill, E., ‘UN gets warning shot on peacekeeping’, The Guardian, 8 September 2000, http://www.theguardian.com.
(15) Lynch, C., ‘U.N. cracks down on corruption in peacekeeping staff’, The Washington Post, 18 December 2007, http://www.nysun.com.
(16) Duclos, S., ‘United Nations facing more corruption allegations’, Digital Journal, 5 May 2008, http://digitaljournal.com.
(17) Ibid.
(18) Cohen, J., ‘Corruption pieces in the Mali puzzle: Context, military, crime and peacekeepers”, Think Africa Press, 21 March 2013, http://thinkafricapress.com.
(19) ‘Corruption and peacekeeping: Strengthening peacekeeping and the United Nations’, Transparency International UK, 9 October 2013, http://www.transparency.org.
(20) Lynch, C., ‘U.N. cracks down on corruption in peacekeeping staff’, The Washington Post, 18 December 2007, http://www.nysun.com.
(21) ‘Corruption and peacekeeping: Strengthening peacekeeping and the United Nations’, Transparency International UK, 9 October 2013, http://www.transparency.org.
(22) Ibid.
(23) Philip, M.,2008. Peacebuilding and corruption. International Peacekeeping, 15(3), pp. 310-327.
(24) Ibid.
(25) Ibid.
(26) Cheng, C.S. and Dominik, Z., 2008. Introduction: Key themes in peacebuilding and corruption. International Peacekeeping, 15(3), pp. 301-309.
(27) De Waal, A., Missions without end? Peacekeeping in the African political marketplace. International Affairs, 85(1), pp. 99-113.
(28) Le Billon, P., 2003. Buying peace or fuelling war: The role of corruption in armed conflicts. Journal of International Development, 14, pp. 413-426.
(29) Le Billon, P., 2008. Corrupting peace? Peacebuilding and post-conflict corruption. International Peacekeeping, 15(3), pp. 344-361.
(30) Ibid.