ABSTRACT

Debates around performance and accountability are now front and centre in discussions around peacekeeping reform. Both concepts are prominent in the UN Secretary-General’s Action for Peacekeeping Initiative, while the Security Council recently stressed the need to improve ‘posture, behaviour, leadership, initiative and accountability’ within peace operations. This paper explores the politics of the accountability debate and the prospects for improved peacekeeper accountability in the context of protection of civilians (PoC) mandates, with an understanding that civilians in conflict often need protection not only from conflict parties but also – as the struggles with sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) demonstrate – from peacekeepers themselves. While strengthened accountability mechanisms can help bridge the gap between the promise and the practice of protection, declining peacekeeping budgets and the amorphous and all-encompassing nature of PoC mandates complicate developing specific performance metrics and accountability mechanisms. Thus, while the UN has struggled to ensure misconduct accountability with regard to SEA, performance accountability represents a challenge of considerably greater magnitude. Absent serious consideration of the structural impediments involved, and the imperative of managing ambiguity, the accountability/performance debate may do little more than exacerbate tensions between those countries who staff peacekeeping missions and those who pay for them.

摘要

围绕绩效和问责制的辩论现在是围绕维和改革讨论的前沿和中心。这两个概念在联合国秘书长的维和行动行动倡议中都很突出，而安理会最近强调需要改善和平行动中的“姿态、行为、领导力、主动性和问责制”。本文探讨了问责制辩论的政治和前景在保护平民 (PoC) 任务的背景下改善维和人员的问责制，并理解冲突中的平民通常不仅需要来自冲突各方的保护，而且 - 正如与性剥削和性虐待 (SEA) 的斗争所表明的 - 来自维和人员本身. 虽然加强问责机制可以帮助弥合保护承诺与实践之间的差距，但维和预算的减少以及 PoC 任务的无定形和包罗万象的性质使制定具体的绩效指标和问责机制变得复杂。因此，虽然联合国一直在努力确保对 SEA 的不当行为问责，但绩效问责制是一项更大的挑战。如果不认真考虑所涉及的结构性障碍，以及管理歧义的必要性，问责制/绩效辩论可能只会加剧维和特派团的配备国家与支付费用的国家之间的紧张关系。