OPen samento

For several years we´ve been listening people claiming that the UN needs a serious restructuring. Many say that its peacekeeping missions are not actually solving the problems in the intervened territories, and the entire concept is in crisis. But, is it?

Peacekeeping is not only about military operations. It also deals with Human Rights; demining; electoral assistance; civilian protection, community welfare, and Rule of Law. All extremely relevant matters; and yet, considerable uncertainty surrounds the future of UN peacekeeping.

Peacekeeping missions are, by definition, temporary operations. The UN establishes an “End State” (the final goal, or objective, of the mission) and, upon arriving it, the mission should close. Having said that, some mission seems to be there forever, without a feasible sign of possible closing time. That´s due to the extremely difficult situations those host nations are suffering in the path from conflict to peace. Therefore, it must be seen as an investment and not an expenditure, because the peacekeepers operate in territories where other people cannot.

Presently, the UN has approximately 90,000 military and police blue helmets from 122 different countries, integrated with civilian staff, in 12 missions around the World. The UN peacekeeping yearly budget is 7,3 billion US Dollars. Although that sum seems to be a huge amount of money, it is only 0,5% of the 1.5 trillion US Dollars the World spends each year in warfare.  Each year, the United States of America deploys more military personnel abroad than the United Nations.

It is consensual that the UN structure and modus operandi needs reviewing, because it was set for the post Second World War environment, but “the times, they are a-changin’ ”. It needs a metamorphosis.

Many say that the number of seats in the permanent board of the United Nations’ Security Council should be enlarged from the current five (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and United States) to 12 and above. Others say that the real problem resides on the “veto” prerogative that the five permanent nations have, and that it should be deleted from the UN Charter. The “veto” tool is (too) regularly used which blocks all major decisions and prevents conflict resolution where their interests are at stake. France and the UK have proposed that the “veto” prerogative should only be used scarcely, under specific conditions that might affect directly and profoundly that nation security. This is an interesting proposal, because it does not require any changes in the UN Charter, or other legislation, been exclusively a political agreement among the five permanent nations. The proposal is under study and appreciation and its approval or refusal could make a considerable difference in the way peacekeeping operations will be done in the future.

The UN Secretary-General – Antonio Guterres – has a project called: the “Future of Peacekeeping”, aiming to anticipate how peace operations might look like. In the last few years, there’s been a 24% reduction in peacekeeping personnel and a 23% reduction in spending. From 2017 further reduction in peacekeeping missions has occurred, and several peacekeeping missions have been closed. Secretary-General Guterres prefers focusing on preventive initiatives and special political and peacebuilding missions with “light footprints.”

A major reason for this new posture is the financial pressure that the major contributors have put over the UN. The United States under former president Trump and some European countries have sought drastic cost reductions, which the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is likely to intensify. However, one should look to the overall landscape of the peacekeeping operations because, despite a range of current constraints, challenges, and crises, UN peace operations are unlikely to finish, but rather to evolve, because:

1 – The World we live in is becoming an evermore a common space, both in all its successes and (mostly) in all its crisis. Stock markets, organized crime, desperate migrants, radical ideologists and pandemics do not stop at our country’s physical borders; therefore, isolationism is not the way to go.  

2 – The problems that the UN is trying to solve do not seem to diminish in the future and, sooner than latter those problems will spill over into the rich countries, jeopardizing their social structure and economy. It is much safer, and cheaper, to solve those problems at the origin, with a UN mandate, than it is to suffer the consequences of a “homeland solution”.

3 – UN peacekeeping missions work! Some may work faster than others, but they do work. Its absence would imply a significantly higher death rate and problem solving, among the supported populations, than it is with UN “boots on the ground”.

4 – UN peace operations are highly cost-effective both as investments for conflict management and in terms of deployment costs. UN member states are unlikely to reject them indefinitely, though peace operations might become less frequent and more constrained in the absence of great power cooperation;

5 – Peace operations remain a potentially useful tool for great powers to manage a wide range of conflicts with international political coverage and public opinion acceptance.

In conclusion, it is true that the UN needs, and will have to, restructure itself in order to adjust to the new World challenges. It must be lighter in its structure, faster in its action and wider in its intervention space. But there is no reason for great powers to abolish peace operations, quite the opposite, they need it to prevail in order to legitimize their problems’ solutions. Hence, there’s no evidence that the United Nations, or its peacekeeping missions, are crisis.

The Portuguese Prime Minister stated that Portugal formally supports the re-application of António Gueterres to the next turn of Secretary-General of the United Nations, starting in January 2022, for five more years. Thus the Portuguese Government will therefore send a letter to the Presidency of the Security Council and the Presidency of the UN General Assembly.

Global climate, the Oceans, COVID 19 Pandemic, World’s Peace and Stability and the reform of the United Nations are the major fields Guterres is expected to deal will during his upcoming mandate.

On February 22, the Italian Ambassador to the Democratic Republic of Congo – Luca Attanasio – his security guard (Carabinieri) – Vittorio Iacovacci – and his driver – Mustapha Milambo – a Congolese contracted locally, were brutally murdered about 20 km from Goma, in the East DRC. The site is within Virunga National Park, on the border between DRC, Rwanda and Uganda, and where several armed rebel groups operate.

The Ambassador’s car was travelling embedded in a convoy of vehicles from the United Nations’ World Food Program, with the aim of visiting and supporting the humanitarian aid activities that were being provided to needy populations in the region. During the attack, the terrorists also kidnapped four other people, one of whom, meanwhile, was found by Congolese security forces.

The Congolese authorities were quick to accuse the Rwandan Hutu rebels of the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (DLFR) of being behind the attack. However, Rwandan DLFR rebels deny responsibility. However, allegedly there´s a jihadist group, close to a terrorist faction that has been perpetrating massacres in northern Mozambique and Tanzania, that claimed the attack. These Jihadists claim that they carried out the attack with a small commando group of six men, using only with Kalashnikov rifles. According to sources, this group of jihadists is trying to capitalize on the success of the attack on the United Nations convoy and it’s calling for more attacks on diplomats in the region.

The UN has about 15,000 military personnel in the country, serving on the MONUSCO peacekeeping mission. After the attack, the area was patrolled by Moroccan blue helmets but, so far, the 3 missing people who have been kidnapped have not yet been found. MONUSCO is currently one of the largest and most dangerous operations in the UN.

We express our condolences to the families of the deceased, our sympathy to the international community in the DRC and Italy, and we wish the speedy recovery of those who are missing.

No dia 22 de fevereiro o Embaixador Italiano para a República Democrática do Congo – Luca Attanasio – o seu segurança (Carabinieri) – Vittorio Iacovacci – e o seu condutor – Mustapha Milambo – um congolense contratado localmente, foram brutalmente assassinados a cerca de 20kms de Goma, no Leste da RDC. O local está dentro do Parque Nacional da Virunga, na fronteira entre a RDCongo, o Ruanda e o Uganda, e onde operam vários grupos armados.

O Embaixador seguia numa coluna de veículos do Programa Alimentar Mundial, das Nações Unidas, com o objetivo de visitar e apoiar as atividades de ajuda humanitária que estava a ser providenciada a populações necessitadas da região. Os atacantes raptaram ainda quatro outras pessoas, tendo uma delas sido, entretanto, encontrada pelas forças de segurança congolenses.

As autoridades congolenses apresaram-se a acusar os rebeldes hutus ruandeses das Forças Democráticas de Libertação do Ruanda (FDLR) de estarem por detrás do ataque. Porém, os rebeldes ruandeses da FDLR negam a responsabilidade. Por outro lado, alegadamente um grupo jihadista, próximo do da fação que tem vindo a perpetrar massacres no norte de Moçambique e na Tanzânia, reclamou o ato, praticado por um pequeno comando de seis homens com Kalashnikov. Segundo fontes, esse grupo de jihadistas exorta o sucesso do ataque às Nações Unidas e apela para que se façam mais ataques a diplomatas na região.

A ONU tem cerca de 15.000 militares no país, servindo na missão de peacekeeping MONUSCO. Após o ataque a zona em questão foi imediatamente patrulhada por capacetes azuis de Marrocos, mas, até ao momento, ainda não foram encontradas as 3 pessoas que foram raptadas. A MONUSCO é atualmente uma das maiores e mais perigosas operações da UN.

Apresentamos as nossas condolências às famílias dos falecidos, à comunidade internacional na RDC e a Itália, e desejamos a rápida recuperação daqueles que estão desaparecidos.

There’s nothing wrong about loving the country. In fact, military personnel swear to give their life serving their country and, regrettably, that does occur quite often. However, is that Patriotism or Nationalism?

One may think it´s only semantic; but it is not! Although the separation line may be very slim, the two concepts are different.

The concept of Nations is normally related to homogenic groups of people with the same ethnicity. It is mainly focus on the people and it doesn’t require a territory to excel its values. Nationalistic feelings lean towards a protective isolation of that specific group of people and, with few exceptions, it tends to look at their own people as different – for the better – from everybody else.

Patriotism introduces the concept of the Territory into the equation. Therefore, anybody (legally) living inside that territory are considered “country fellows”. The concept of Country (population + territory) takes over and Patriotism focus on the love to the land and all cultures within it.

A Patriot loves his/her country and does his/her best for that country to thrive; but he/she does not mind for other countries to proper also.

A Nationalist also loves his/her country, but more focused on his/her own people; almost in an elitist way. A Nationalist has issues regarding different groups inside his/her country and, above all, they do not normally appreciate other countries to be as prosper, let alone more prosper, than their own.

Therefore, Nationalism is dangerous because it not only isolates the country regarding the rest of the World, but it also segregates people inside that one country; – look at what happened in the Former Yugoslavia and, in particular, in Bosnia Herzegovina.

As a result of the Nationalist populist speech of the political leaders, almost a quarter of a million people died in the Former Yugoslavia´s wars. Now it seems that the same kind of ideology is showing-up in other contries and territories, provoking instability and non democtratic postures. Let´s stop this … please.

A Patriot connects himself/herself to the diversity of the cultural, linguistic, historical and territorial community identified as Homeland. A Nationalist, on the other hand, sees himself/herself as the bearer of an unfulfilled destiny, whatever it may be, independence, development, power or autonomy.

I love my country and all its people; I respect and enforce the fulfillment of the values expressed in its Constitution; and respect the international commitments it has; even with the risk of my own life (Portuguese military personnel oath to the Flag)..

I am a Patriot.

Once, during one of my overseas missions, an old soldier, veteran of many wars, enlightened me by sharing his stories. Knowledge made of experience gathered in many theaters of operations. Expressing my gratitude for that information sharing, I said:

– “Thank you for sharing your experience, maybe one day one of your your stories will save my skin.”

To which he replied:

– “If my stories save you … go out and save someone else … tell them your own stories, that’s how it’s supposed to work!”

Therefore, I became a veterans’ story teller. The future doesn’t come with an instruction manual, but it does come with a list of past mishaps. The veterans call it experience; planers call it Lessons Learn; I simply call it the fulfilling of a promise I made to an old soldier; something I can only pay in small installments. I hope each of my stories can help the new generation, and I ask them to carry on the chain … because “that’s how it’s supposed to work”.

I remember, many years ago, in an African airfield, a group of demobilized soldiers tried to board one UN aircraft. Irritated and in despair for not being able to board the aircraft, some fired their weapons and started a battle. There were bullets flying around the airfield.

I was surrounded by people screaming and crying in several languages. I continued to work, and moving from one side to another, because shots were a commonplace in that region of the world; hence I was not too worried about it.

Then, unexpectedly, I felt something hitting the floor very hard next to me, and only after did I hear the sound of a shot. That shot had been made in my direction, because bullets fly faster than sound. Soon after, I felt a breath of air on the right side of my face followed by a hiss. Again, only after I heard the sound of the shot. Those shots were definitely not stray bullets.

I blushed when I realized the extent of my stupidity, because I knew that “the point of maximum danger coincides with the point of minimum fear”. That day I learned a valuable lesson – Overconfidence can kill you in the battle field.

A few days ago, I participated in an online workshop about writing memories, organized by the City Hall of my home town – Seixal. At a certain step, I was challenged to write in a few minutes a short story under the theme “memory of a special laugh”. I confessed the surprise on the subject, but I managed to quickly rewind the memories until I stopped in a big and long laugh, aboard an airplane, on the aircraft ramp of Newark Airport in the United States.

It was the end of the 90s, when I had to travel from Lisbon to NATO Headquarters in the United States, which would require a transfer internal flight from Newark – New Jersey – to Norfolk – Virginia.

The TAP (Air Portugal) flight that would take me to Newark had a (very) late departure, compromising my internal connection to Norfolk. Irritated right at the start, I recalled the sarcastic interpretation of the acronym TAP – Take Another Plane.

Upon arriving in Newark, the inevitable was confirmed, my connecting flight had taken off a long time ago. The girl behind the Continental counter looked for a solution, and suggested a flight in the late afternoon. As I had someone waiting for me at Norfolk Airport, I pressed her for a faster solution. When she saw that I was frankly irritated by my lack of luck, and that I only had hand luggage to board, the girl discovered another flight, which was just about to depart, and assigned me a seat on that plane. I ran to the boarding gate as I realized that I was not the only passenger to answer the “last call” on that flight.

We boarded a minibus and were deposited at the doorstep of a twin propeller, with a maximum capacity of 19 passengers.

Upon boarding, I noticed that the first place on the right side was occupied by a blind man, who was accompanied by a guide dog lying at his feet.

The plane was filled with the last passengers to board. The door closed and the only flight attendant started demonstrating security procedures. At that point, the captain’s voice appeared on the loudspeakers announcing that the aircraft was too heavy, because it had been fueled for a longer flight. Thus, the pilot invited passengers to leave for the terminal in order to remove fuel, which is considered a long and dangerous maneuver.

After some time, there we were invited back to the Continental twin-engine. However, after tightening the seat belts, the pilot returned to the sound system and informed the passengers that the delay had an impact on the flight planning, and that there was a line of strong turbulence (cumulonimbus) on our route, so we should wait a few minutes on the ground until the control tower would inform us that the weather had improved. The pilot left the two engines rotating in order to respond immediately to a tower authorization. However, time was passing by and there was no news of weather improvements. My delay regarding my point of contact at destination was so great that I stopped worrying about it, and started to laugh at everything that was happening around me. To the left of my place a young man was exalted with great loudness because he was going to miss a job interview in Norfolk, behind him a lady of color, with a considerable volume, was also vociferating something that my level of English could not understand. The environment inside little Beechcraft started to be caustically fun.

As the aircraft was very small, hence the cockpit crew was perfectly aware of what was going on just a few meters behind. It was at that time that the commanding pilot returned to the sound system, with a very embarrassed voice, said:

– “Ladies and gentlemen passengers, it seems that the enroute meteorology is improving significantly, and the tower released us suggesting a slightly different route. However, now we have not enough fuel for this flight, so we will have to add some fuel to be safe and on schedule. I ask you to wait inside the bus which is on its way to our place, in order to avoid the inconvenience of a trip back and forward to the terminal. I promise that we will be brief and will leave shortly thereafter.”

I was already taking all that in a sportive way, and I laughed at everything and everyone. By my reckoning, by that time we should be landing in Norfolk – Virginia – and we were still on the Newark apron – in New Jersey.

When everything seemed ready to go, the most hilarious part occurred: – the blind man’s dog started to whine. The owner called the airhostess and told her that the animal had to go out to do its “needs”. Imagine what it would be like having a blind man walking a dog, on an aviation apron where several planes had propeller engines running. The pilot in command instructed Go on, the reluctant flight attendant to go for a walk with the animal on the back of Beechcraft. When she got close to my window, the animal stopped and crouched down to defecate.

At that time, the airhostess was approached by a ramp operator gesturing in exasperation with an exaggerated choreography. The man complained (we learned later) that “that” could not stay there because when our plane would increase its engines power the waste would “take off” and crash into the aircraft support gear parked behind our spot.

Inside the plane, everyone was delirious with the scene, leaning over the windows on my side of the plane. When the girl returned to the aircraft, she handed the dog over to the owner and came back out with a lot of “airsickness bags”. Then she returned back in, with an expression so disgusted that it looked like she was going to use one of the remaining bags herself. The bags with the “precious content” were stored in the cockpit and the plane door closed again.

I had laughed so hard at what happened that my abdominal muscles hurt. But the special laugh only came when the pilot said we were number two to take off, right behind the aircraft that the Continental counter girl had originally suggested me; and I refused.

Há uns dias, participei num ateliê online de escrita e memória organizado pela Camara Municipal do Seixal. A dado passo, fui desafiado a escrever em escassos minutos uma curta história sob o tema “memória de uma gargalhada especial”. Confesso a surpresa no mote do desafio, mas consegui rebobinar rapidamente as recordações até parar numa grande e prolongada gargalhada, a bordo de um avião, na placa do Aeroporto de Newark nos Estados Unidos.

Estávamos no final dos anos 90, quando tive de me deslocar de Lisboa ao Quartel-General da NATO em Norfolk, nos Estados Unidos, com uma transferência de voos internos em Newark – New Jersey.

O voo da TAP que me levaria a Newark saiu deveras atrasado, comprometendo à partida a minha ligação interna para Norfolk. Irritado logo à descolagem, relembrei a interpretação sarcástica do acrónimo TAP – Take Another Plane.

Ao chegar a Newark confirmou-se o inevitável, o meu voo de ligação já tinha descolado há muito tempo. A moça que estava atrás do balcão da Continental procurou uma solução, e sugeriu-me um voo ao final da tarde. Como eu tinha alguém à minha espera no aeroporto de Norfolk pressionei-a para uma solução mais célere. Ao verificar que me encontrava francamente irritado com a pouca minha sorte, e que só tinha bagagem de mão para embarcar, a moça descobriu um outro voo, que estava quase a partir, a atribuiu-me um lugar nesse avião. Corri para a porta de embarque enquanto me ia apercebendo que não era o único passageiro a responder à “última chamada” daquele voo.

Embarcámos num minibus que nos depositou à porta de um bimotor a hélice, com uma capacidade máxima de 19 passageiros.

Ao embarcar, reparei que o primeiro lugar do lado direito era ocupado por um cego, que se fazia acompanhar por um cão guia deitado a seus pés.

O avião ficou cheio com os últimos passageiros a embarcar. A porta fechou-se e a única hospedeira de bordo começou a fazer a demonstração dos procedimentos de segurança. Nisto, a voz do comandante de bordo surgiu nos altifalantes anunciando que a aeronave tinha demasiado peso, porque havia sido abastecida com combustível para um voo mais longo. Desta forma, o piloto convidou os passageiros a sair para o terminal a fim de retirar combustível, o que é considerado uma manobra demorada e perigosa.

Passado algum tempo, lá fomos convidados a reembarcar no bimotor da Continental. Porém, após apertarmos os cintos, o piloto regressou ao sistema de som e informou os passageiros, que a demora tinha tido um impacto no planeamento do voo, e que agora havia uma linha de muita turbulência (cumulonimbus) no nosso trajeto, pelo que deveríamos aguardar no chão alguns minutos até a torre de controlo informar que a meteorologia teria melhorado. O piloto deixou os motores a turbinar a fim de responder de imediato a uma autorização da torre. Porém, o tempo ia passando e não havia novidades de melhorias meteorológicas. O atraso em relação a quem me aguardava no destino era tão grande que deixei de me preocupar, e comecei a rir-me de tudo o que se estava a passar em minha volta. À esquerda do meu lugar um jovem exaltava-se com grande sonoridade porque iria perder uma entrevista de trabalho em Norfolk, mais atrás uma senhora de cor, com um volume considerável, também vociferava qualquer coisa que o meu nível de Inglês não conseguia entender. O ambiente dentro do pequeno Beechcraft começou a ficar causticamente divertido.

Como a aeronave era muito pequena, a tripulação do cockpit estava perfeitamente consciente daquilo que se passava uns escassos metros mais a trás. Foi nessa altura que o piloto comandante regressou ao sistema de som, com uma voz deveras comprometida, e disse.

 – “Senhoras e senhores passageiros, parece que a meteorologia em rota está a melhorar francamente, e a torre sugeriu um trajeto um pouco diferente. Porém, agora temos combustível a menos para este voo, pelo que vamos ter de meter um pouco de carburante para estarmos seguros e dentro dos procedimentos.  Solicito que aguardem dentro no autocarro que está a caminho do nosso local, para evitar os transtornos de uma viagem para o terminal. Prometo que seremos breves e partiremos logo de seguida.”

Eu já estava a levar a coisa na desportiva, e ria-me de tudo e de todos. Pelas minhas contas, por essa altura já estaríamos quase a aterrar em Norfolk – na Virgínia – e ainda estávamos na placa de Newark – em New Jersey.

Quando tudo parecia pronto para seguirmos, ocorreu a parte mais hilariante: – o cão do cego começou a ganir. O dono chamou a hospedeira e disse-lhe que o animal tinha de sair para fazer “necessidades”. Imagine-se o que seria um cego a passear um cão, numa placa de aviação onde vários aviões tinham os motores a hélice a turbinar. Vai daí, o comandante de bordo deu instruções à relutante hospedeira para ir fazer um passeio com o animal, na parte de trás do Beechcraft. Ao chegar próximo da minha janela, o animal parou e agachou-se para defecar.

Nessa altura, a hospedeira foi abordada por um operador de placa, que gesticulava exasperado com uma coreografia exagerada. O homem queixava-se (soubemos mais tarde) que “aquilo” não podia ficar ali porque quando o nosso avião metesse motores os dejetos iriam “descolar” e esborrachar-se no aparelho parqueado no spot detrás.

Dentro do avião, toda a gente delirava com a cena, debruçados sobre as janelas do meu lado do avião. Quando a moça regressou ao aparelho entregou o cãozinho ao dono e voltou a sair com um monte de “sacos de enjoo”. Depois regressou com uma expressão tão enojada que parecia que ela própria iria usar um dos sacos sobrantes. Os sacos com o “precioso conteúdo” foram armazenados no cockpit e a porta do avião voltou a fechar-se.

Eu tinha rido tanto com o ocorrido que me doíam os músculos abdominais. Mas a gargalhada especial só veio quando o piloto disse que estávamos em número dois para descolar, logo atrás da aeronave que a moça do balcão da Continental me tinha inicialmente sugerido; e que eu recusei.

Hymn of the United Nations (with lyrics)

Eagerly, musician.
Sweep your string,
So we may sing.
Elated, optative,
Our several voices
Interblending,
Playfully contending,
Not interfering
But co-inhering,
For all within
The cincture
of the sound,
Is holy ground
Where all are brothers,
None faceless Others,

Let mortals beware
Of words, for
With words we lie,
Can say peace
When we mean war,
Foul thought speak- fair
And promise falsely,
But song is true:
Let music for peace
Be the paradigm,
For peace means to change
At the right time,
as the World-Clock
Goes Tick- and Tock.

So may the story
Of our human city
Presently move
Like music, when
Begotten notes
New notes beget
Making the flowing
Of time a growing
Till what it could be,

At last it is,
Where even sadness
Is a form of gladness,
Where fate is freedom,
Grace and Surprise.

UN Peacekeepers Day | Tribute

Beyoncé – I Was Here (United Nations World Humanitarian Day Performance Video)

United Nations Song

Shakira – Imagine (Live at the UN’s General Assembly 2015)

United Nations Peacekeeping Mission Song – For The Peacekeepers | Annefleur Bruin | TEDxAlcoi

United Nations Song – New World Order Behind Closed Doors

United | Playing For Change | Song Around the World

Keel – UNited Nations