23 August 2001

Dear Sir

I refer to your article entitled Bystanders to Genocide [September 2001] in which you analyse the 1994 international reaction to the slaughter of 800,000 Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda. International intervention was minimal - the small UN peacekeeping force deployed found that there was no peace to keep and were under-resourced to prevent the catastrophe taking place around them. After 10 Belgian peacekeepers were savagely killed the Belgians withdrew their contingent, closely followed by the withdrawal of most of the remaining peacekeepers. This left the way clear for the systematic and savage killing to continue virtually unhindered.

But perhaps there was another option - an option which could have made a significant impact and which would not have exposed military personnel of other nations to material risk. In nearby Angola a private military company (PMC) called Executive Outcomes had been contracted the year before to assist the internationally recognised government end a debilitating 20 year civil war. By 1994 the effect of their involvement was being felt (and reported in the press). In fact, the intervention of this company's experienced personnel would, in under two years, create the conditions for a peace accord in that country. Executive Outcomes could have been hired by the UN to either supplement or replace the peacekeeping force in Rwanda. Their successes elsewhere in Africa have proven that they can make a real difference.

Perhaps it is time for the UN to seriously consider the option of contracting with professional, properly constituted PMCs when the situation demands not "peace keeping" but "peace creation"? However unpalatable to some persistent cynics this use of the private sector to provide military services may be, surely it is preferable to standing by and watching the death of hundreds of thousands of Africans and the destruction of whole countries?

Yours

Michael Grunberg

<< Back to List   Sandline Home