DCAF a centre for security, development and the rule of law

Aligning Protection of Civilians and SSR Experience from UN peacekeeping Fairlie Chappuis, Research Division, DCAF

Definitions POC: a variety of definitions depending on implementing organization  protection of civilians from direct physical violence SSR: frequently confused with security assistance or poorly implemented as train-&-equip (“lazy” SSR)  effectiveness and accountability within a framework of democratic governance, rule of law, respect for human rights

So what’s the problem? The idea that SSR always, everywhere and necessarily contributes to the immediate goals of POC is a widespread misunderstanding of both POC and SSR, which allows potential risks and unintended consequences to go unnoticed. Outline: -Why is this the case? Concepts -Where and how does this happen? Tensions in policy and practice -What can we do about it? Aligning POC and SSR *This presentation is based on research by Chappuis and Gorur, “Reconciling Security Sector Reform And The Protection Of Civilians In Peacekeeping Contexts,” Civilians in Conflict Issue Brief, No.3, January

1. Concepts POC and SSR share: Human security Human rights State responsibility State as threat The crucial difference: POC emphasizes direct action to prevent or halt abuses while SSR is a structural intrvention that aims to tackle root causes. POC is a stop-gap measure, for an interim period until the state can fulfil its responsibility to provide human security (or peacekeepers leave). SSR is a long-term agenda aimed entirely at enabling the state to eventually provide human security.

2. Tensions in policy and practice Is SSR a sub-field of POC? Or is it separate but complimentary? Is it always complimentary? 1. Timing: short vs. long-term agendas 2. Relationships with host governments

2. Timing: short- vs. long-term agendas POC focus on immediate capacity and integrity may distract from deeper problems of security sector governance (SSR) – “Lazy” SSR: e.g. one-off trainings vs. payroll reforms – Exit strategies: POC may convert SSR into a short-sighted exit-strategy

2. Relationships with host governments In theory both POC and SSR recognize danger of state security forces abusing population In practice SSR requires building relationships that can complicate POC – E.g. South Sudan, DRC, Liberia Providing security is not the same as supporting reform of the security sector

3. Aligning POC and SSR Natural points of intersection – Vetting security forces – Training, especially IHL and human rights law – Monitoring and reporting in the field Principles that help mitigate friction – Community responsiveness – Impartiality

DCAF a centre for security, development and the rule of law