The role of Defence Forces in development

Speech notes for address to delegates from around New Zealand and from the Asia-Pacific region at the Asia-Pacific Model United Nations Conference. University of Auckland

To the delegates from around New Zealand and from the Asia-Pacific region, welcome to the Asia-Pacific Model United Nations Conference.

I extend a welcome also on behalf of the Prime Minister, Helen Clark, who was unable to be here yesterday. She has asked to join with me in acknowledging the important role of this Conference in raising awareness of the United Nations and its role.

New Zealand is a strong believer in multilateralism and in the United Nations as a forum for countries to work together to address critical issues such as security and development.

New Zealand was one of 50 countries that met in San Francisco in 1945 to establish the United Nations in the belief that there was a need collectively to resolve conflicts between nations and prevent wars.

In 1914 and again in 1939, New Zealand had sent troops to fight in two world wars which engulfed much of humanity.

In the First World War, we lost over 17,000 troops, the second highest per capita casualty rate of any nation. In the Second World War, we lost over 12,000, the highest per capita casualty rate of any Commonwealth country.

We were determined thereafter that such a war should not happen again.

To the extent that a third world war has been avoided, the United Nations has been a success. However, more than 20 million people have died since 1945 in localised wars.

For 62 years we have also co-existed with weapons of mass destruction. New Zealand regards nuclear weapons as a threat to humanity, not a source of security.

While the end of the Cold War saw a diminishing of tensions and a reduction in nuclear stockpiles, today more than 27,000 nuclear warheads remain. Each has a destructive power between 8 and 40 times as great as the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

New Zealand is committed to avoiding the consequences of a nuclear holocaust. Twenty years ago we declared ourselves nuclear free, and have promoted a nuclear weapons free South Pacific and Southern hemisphere.

We have played a leading role in seeking to strengthen the Non-proliferation Treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and a treaty to stop the production of weapon-strength fissile material.

Clearly, however, in disarmament and in ending conflict and securing prosperity, we have as yet not met the vision of those who founded the United Nations, and enormous challenges remain.

The membership of the United Nations has nearly quadrupled from the 50 states represented at San Francisco in 1945 to 192 nations today.

The majority are characterised as developing countries and face wide ranging political, social and economic problems.

In 2000, at the start of a new century, the United Nations Summit agreed on Millennium Development Goals designed to:

• eradicate poverty and hunger,
• achieve universal primary education,
• promote gender equality,
• reduce child mortality and improve maternal health,
• combat diseases such as AIDS and malaria and
• ensure environmental sustainability.

There was recognition that a package of measures was needed, addressing together the challenges of peace, security, development and human rights.

There was recognition that each of these goals were related.

As Kofi Annan said:

“we will not enjoy development without security, we will not enjoy security without development and we will not enjoy either without respect for human rights. Unless all these causes are advanced none will succeed."

In the year that the Millennium Development Goals were set, around the world a third of a million people lost their lives as a direct result of armed conflict. Hundreds and thousands more were injured or made homeless as a result.

And millions suffered deprivation and abuse of their human rights.

At the end of the following year on 11 September 2001, another dimension was added to the world's problems with a new level of internationally organised terrorism.

The readiness to murder large numbers of innocent people, and the expressed wish by terrorist groups to secure weapons of mass destruction has added further to threat levels in the world.

Today I want to talk a little about how my portfolio responsibilities in Defence relate to addressing some of these problems.

New Zealand's Defence Force is trained and equipped for combat, and when there is no alternative to the use of force in response to threats against us, they have been, and will be used, in that role.

But more frequently, we deploy our Defence Force in a peacekeeping and security role.

More than 400 of our troops are currently deployed in over 14 countries. I want to focus on their role in just three - Afghanistan, Solomon Islands and Timor Leste.

Afghanistan
In Afghanistan, New Zealand deployed under a United Nations mandate in 2001, when the Taliban regime refused to act against the terrorist organisation Al Qaeda which it hosted and which was responsible for the murder of nearly 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

New Zealand provided three rotations of our SAS forces to act against Al Qaeda and Taliban forces. Some insight into their role was given yesterday in the Citation for Corporal Willie Apiata who was awarded the Victoria Cross.

But our major effort in Afghanistan today is through the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT), which operates in the province of Bamyan.

The PRT, made up of over 120 Defence Force men and women, provides both security and development support.

It assisted in voter registration and the election process through which Afghanistan held its first ever democratic elections for a President and parliament.

The Governor of Bamyan, Governor Sarabi, by the way is a very capable woman. Under the Taliban, women were barred from positions of power, from working and girls from attending school.

The PRT has supported disarmament and reintegration of former Afghan fighters.

• It provides training for the local police force.
• PRT patrols build a sense of security and community confidence, which assists the central and provincial government operate.
• Within the secure environment it has created, NGOs and aid organisations, such as the Aga Khan Foundation, can operate and improve the lives of local people.
• The PRT itself helps with infrastructure programmes such as building roads, bridges and schools, and in the provision of medical services.
• It epitomises the mutual relationship between security and development, with each relying on the other.

I have visited Bamyan twice. On the streets it was quickly obvious to me that the Kiwi emblem worn of the shoulders of our men and women police and Defence Force officers symbolised to local people a country which had come to help them achieve peace and stability.

The Hazara people had reason to hate the Taliban, who had executed hundreds of their leaders in cold blood in the township of Bamyan. The Taliban had also destroyed the 1500 year-old huge carved statues of Buddha, which Bamyan was famous for, in an act of barbaric vandalism and intolerance.

The welcome our Defence Force and police personnel get from children and adults alike in Bamyan indicates that New Zealanders are regarded as friends and not occupiers.

Solomon Islands
The Solomon Islands are much closer to home and are both neighbours (in a Pacific sense which means they can be thousands of kilometres away) and fellow members of the Pacific Islands Forum.

The Solomon Islands Government sought assistance from Australia and New Zealand in 2003 when lawlessness and ethnic conflict threatened the collapse of the state.

We were reluctant to intervene in the knowledge that it is difficult for an outside country to go into another sovereign state without assuming the responsibilities of that state for its problems and finding solutions.

But it is also difficult to stand by while a state collapses with all the consequences of violence and destruction which that can imply for local people.

The intervention was decided upon collectively by Pacific Forum states and was multifaceted. It included not only conventional security and law and order through our troops and police, but also assistance in building the social and economic institutions of state.

The intervention has been hugely popular with probably a level of support from local people in excess of 95 percent.

Order was restored, hundreds of millions of dollars in development assistance has been given and an environment created for a free and fair election three years later.

Sadly, factional conflict between the politicians after the election saw widespread destruction of the Chinese commercial area and lawlessness in Honiara after the elections.

The Australian and New Zealand military presence had again to be stepped up to restore the security environment.

The new Government, however, is less welcoming of the Regional Assistance Mission which it saw as an obstacle to pursuing its own vested interests.

Without a consent environment from the Government, even though there is strong popular support for the Mission, our presence may not be able to be sustained.

It would, however, be tragic to see the huge advances made in the Solomons lost.

The situation demonstrates the complexity of providing security and development assistance in an environment which may be corrupt, and to act if there is no consent from those who hold power.

Timor Leste
In Timor Leste, Australia, New Zealand and other members of the international community intervened under a United Nations mandate in 1999.

This followed a referendum in which local people voted for independence rather than remain in Indonesia. This resulted in mass destruction and violence from pro-Indonesia militias.

Under UN leadership, East Timor received huge assistance to rebuild and to create the institutions of state needed for independence, which it gained in 2002.

Sadly the initial success proved short lived and divisions within the country and the failure of state institutions saw renewed violence in April last year forcing thousands to flee to refugee camps.

The beleaguered government invited forces from Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Portugal again to intervene to restore law and order and stability.

In parallel, the United Nations has responded to the breakdown of authority with a new mission to address policing, justice, good governance, institutional capacity building and economic development issues.

We currently have over 180 Defence Force personnel in Timor maintaining security, including an infantry company and a detachment of helicopters.

Twenty-five New Zealand Police are serving with the UN Police in Timor. Our military and police forces provided support to the UN in the build up to last week’s elections, which so far have gone peacefully.

The situation in Timor Leste is stable but fragile. International police and defence support, as well as the UN and regional capacity building, remains essential to prevent widespread violence and preserve security.

In both Timor Leste and Solomon Islands, the absence of law and order and security risk destroying the prospects for real and sustainable economic development.

Security is necessary for development. And again development underlies the creation of sustainable stability.

Conclusions
To conclude, what lessons can we draw from our experience in these two countries and Afghanistan.

• Firstly, the need for a holistic approach.

  In each of these missions, security forces are essential. They help stabilise a volatile situation as an essential first step.

  Insecurity and violence are the most obvious and pressing problems. But they are the manifestation of the deep-seated weaknesses, in particular ethnic tension, weak or corrupt central authorities, and lack of economic opportunity, which also need to be addressed. For this reason military and policing inputs need to be complemented by development initiatives aimed at rebuilding state institutions.

• Secondly, interventions must be balanced.

  We must, as Kofi Annan put it, strike the right balance between hard and soft responses. Military forces will often be required to end instability and lawlessness where insurgents are a threat.

  But the use of force can also undermine the consent environment, especially when it causes harm to local people. Civilian casualties in dealing with insurgents or a heavy-handed approach to the local population will quickly turn them against intervention forces.

  Skill and sensitivity on the part of military forces is required to avoid that. It also means the military must have a clear mandate, good command and control, excellent intelligence and professional leadership, as well as exemplary soldiering skills.

• Thirdly, interventions must be inclusive.

  The relationship between the intervening partners and the host needs to be a partnership in pursuit of shared goals. Being invited by the host government and maintaining a consent environment are important elements in the success of a mission. This is not always straightforward, especially where local governance institutions have collapsed.

  The local government needs to maintain ownership of its country's problems and the solutions to them.

Ending or preventing a conflict is often easier than the difficult job of nation building that must follow in order for sustainable development to be achieved.

But nation building cannot take place unless security is established.

Some suggest that we should leave populations to sort out their own problems in their own way. But this approach will often mean state failure, loss of life and havens for terrorism and transnational crime.

At its worst, it has led to genocide. Rwanda and Srebrenica, where the world stood back and did nothing while thousands were slaughtered are not experiences we would wish to see repeated.

The international community is right, as the UN did recently, to accept a responsibility to protect citizens where fundamental human rights are at risk.

Defence and other security forces will therefore continue to find themselves at the front of rescue efforts for failed or troubled states.

Their primary mission will remain to stabilise the situation and provide a security platform so that economic, social and national development can take place.

This places a premium on multiple layers of coordination – between defence forces from different countries, between defence forces and development agencies and NGOs, between defence forces and the local government, and between defence forces and the international community, whether represented by the United Nations and its agencies or in some other way.

Afghanistan, Timor Leste, and Solomon Islands are examples of this process in action.

I believe that New Zealand can be proud of its commitment to and its actions in these three countries, notwithstanding the complexity of the difficulties and the frustrations often faced in realising results.

I hope that participation in this 12th Asia-Pacific Model UN Conference helps provide you with the opportunity to discuss and debate these issues and what the United Nations and its member countries should do to resolve them.

I wish you well for the remainder of your conference.

Thank you.