April 18, 2007
Peacemaking in a Troubled World: From Lebanon to Afghanistan and Iraq: A Personal View
Lakhdar Brahimi
Former Foreign Minister of Algeria and UN Senior Envoy to Afghanistan - now at Institute for Advanced Study
Minutes of the 28th Meeting of the 65th Year
At 10:15 AM President Giordmaine called the over 100 attending members to order at the Friend Center for the 28th meeting of the 64th year. George Hansen led the invocation. Charlie Ufford read the minutes of the previous meeting. Joan Fleming introduced her husband, John, as a guest. Our indebtedness to Charlie Jaffin, the previous chair of the Nominating Committee, was acknowledged, and it was reported that he is recovering well from his recent surgery. It was announced that Joe Bolster is the new Chair and that John Lasley, Henry King and Harvey Rothberg have agreed to serve on that committee.
David Dodge introduced our speaker, Lakhdar Brahimi. An Algerian with a rich experience in international diplomacy, Brahimi was twice the UN special representative in Afghanistan first in 1997-1999 and again from 2001 to 2004. During that latter period his mandate also embraced time in Iraq advising on steps needed following the overthrow of Saddam Husayn’s regime. Earlier diplomatic service included a role in the South African move away from apartheid and the advent of Nelson Mandela to power (1993-1994) and other missions to the Congo, Yemen, Liberia, Nigeria and Sudan. He played a pivotal role during the years 1989-1991 in the Arab League sponsored settlement of the fifteen year long Lebanese civil war. Earlier in his career Brahimi served his native Algeria as ambassador to several different countries and then from 1991 to 1993 he was Algeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs. Most of all, he is known as a seasoned specialist on UN peace operations. Indeed, in between his tours in Afghanistan he headed a UN panel set up to review United Nations peace operations, and that report, released in 2000, is understandably known as the “Brahimi report.”
Brahimi began his talk by pointing out that the end of the Cold War did not signal the end of conflicts. The UN today has some 18 different peace missions manned by 20,000 UN civilians and roughly 100,000 soldiers, making this multi-national UN “army” the second largest army operating outside its national borders, second only to the US. These conflicts, he noted, are mainly internal conflicts, wars within borders not across borders. The US invasion of Iraq, a war of choice, is of a different category. As for the record in these many cases of bringing peace Brahimi sees the UN as having been reasonably successful. At the same time, with different priorities peace keeping missions could do better. His recommendations amount to having a more modest and more focused mission. Do not promise the moon. Do not be overly concerned about rushing to hold elections. They offer no “magical virtue.” The same caution was offered concerning quickly writing constitutions. The Afghan constitution cobbled together in December-January 2003-2004 worked reasonably well, but it was a risky and hasty venture that might well have failed. As for the Iraqi constitution (2005) it is a “monster”, a “prescription for civil war”. Much better to concentrate on the rule of law which Brahimi crisply categorized as more police, judges and prisons, adding that people in these situations need judges more than members of Parliament.
With the same sense of sober realism Brahimi insisted that peace keeping missions work only to the extent that neighbors to the country involved are brought into the process, and he cut right to a matter of moment to Americans worrying about Iraq by asserting that we may see Turkey and Jordan as “good guys” vis-à-vis Iraq while Syria and Iran are “bad guys”, but all must be involved if progress is to be achieved.
With a touch of humor that had its cutting edge Brahimi noted that he would tell his UN underlings that in any peace mission they needed to consider first the neighbors, then the great powers and last the United States, because even if one wants to divorce his wife he must clear it with the United States.
Following a brief question period the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
L. Carl Brown
David Dodge introduced our speaker, Lakhdar Brahimi. An Algerian with a rich experience in international diplomacy, Brahimi was twice the UN special representative in Afghanistan first in 1997-1999 and again from 2001 to 2004. During that latter period his mandate also embraced time in Iraq advising on steps needed following the overthrow of Saddam Husayn’s regime. Earlier diplomatic service included a role in the South African move away from apartheid and the advent of Nelson Mandela to power (1993-1994) and other missions to the Congo, Yemen, Liberia, Nigeria and Sudan. He played a pivotal role during the years 1989-1991 in the Arab League sponsored settlement of the fifteen year long Lebanese civil war. Earlier in his career Brahimi served his native Algeria as ambassador to several different countries and then from 1991 to 1993 he was Algeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs. Most of all, he is known as a seasoned specialist on UN peace operations. Indeed, in between his tours in Afghanistan he headed a UN panel set up to review United Nations peace operations, and that report, released in 2000, is understandably known as the “Brahimi report.”
Brahimi began his talk by pointing out that the end of the Cold War did not signal the end of conflicts. The UN today has some 18 different peace missions manned by 20,000 UN civilians and roughly 100,000 soldiers, making this multi-national UN “army” the second largest army operating outside its national borders, second only to the US. These conflicts, he noted, are mainly internal conflicts, wars within borders not across borders. The US invasion of Iraq, a war of choice, is of a different category. As for the record in these many cases of bringing peace Brahimi sees the UN as having been reasonably successful. At the same time, with different priorities peace keeping missions could do better. His recommendations amount to having a more modest and more focused mission. Do not promise the moon. Do not be overly concerned about rushing to hold elections. They offer no “magical virtue.” The same caution was offered concerning quickly writing constitutions. The Afghan constitution cobbled together in December-January 2003-2004 worked reasonably well, but it was a risky and hasty venture that might well have failed. As for the Iraqi constitution (2005) it is a “monster”, a “prescription for civil war”. Much better to concentrate on the rule of law which Brahimi crisply categorized as more police, judges and prisons, adding that people in these situations need judges more than members of Parliament.
With the same sense of sober realism Brahimi insisted that peace keeping missions work only to the extent that neighbors to the country involved are brought into the process, and he cut right to a matter of moment to Americans worrying about Iraq by asserting that we may see Turkey and Jordan as “good guys” vis-à-vis Iraq while Syria and Iran are “bad guys”, but all must be involved if progress is to be achieved.
With a touch of humor that had its cutting edge Brahimi noted that he would tell his UN underlings that in any peace mission they needed to consider first the neighbors, then the great powers and last the United States, because even if one wants to divorce his wife he must clear it with the United States.
Following a brief question period the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
L. Carl Brown