UNEPS Updates!
Click here to read about global initiatives and events on the UNEPS proposal.

Materials:

UN Emergency Peace Service publication (2006)

Un servicio de paz de emergencia de la ONU, Spanish translation of above publication (2007)

UN Service d'Urgence d'Assistance à la Paix des Nations Unies: Pour Prévenir le Génocide et des Crimes Contre l'Humanité, French translation of UNEPS proposal.

UNEPS color brochure
This one-page brochure may be reprinted and distributed.

Um Serviço de Emergência das Nações Unidas para a Paz, UNEPS brochure in Portuguese.

House Bill 213 on a United Nations Emergency Peace Service, introduced on March 5, 2007

UNEPS Factsheet and Talking Points, prepared by Citizens for Global Solutions, Jan. 2007.

Additional Information:

"Frequently Asked Questions" on the UNEPS proposal

UNEPS News Digests
May 2007
October 2006
June 2006
July 2006

About the United Nations Emergency Peace Service (UNEPS):

THE NEED:

Despite the need at times to move quickly to prevent genocide, "ethnic cleansing," and crimes against humanity, the United Nations has no reliable capacity to move promptly, even if halting a catastrophe would save hundreds of thousands of lives. Genocide in Rwanda illustrates this incapacity, as do the massive killings of innocent people in Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia, East Timor, Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Sudan, and elsewhere.

The time has come to create a permanent UN Emergency Peace Service (UNEPS) to ensure that the next preventable humanitarian disaster will not occur. Such a service could have prevented many of the atrocities that have killed millions of civilians, wounded millions more, forced tens of millions from their homes, destroyed entire economies, and wasted hundreds of billions of dollars. Of course such a service would not be a panacea for security problems in general; it would be designed to complement--not replace--other national, regional, and United Nations efforts. Yet an emergency service could provide immediate, full protection in some crises and serve as an advance peace service that would prepare the way for subsequent additional help, if needed, in larger conflicts--a vital function that is not provided by any existing agency. Such a service could also help address extreme environmental and natural disasters as an emergency resort.

THE PROPOSAL:

Because a UN emergency service would be permanent, based at UN designated sites, and include mobile field headquarters, it could move to quell an emergency within 48 hours after United Nations authorization. Since it would be individually recruited from among volunteers from many countries, it would not suffer the reluctance of UN members to deploy their own national units. As its 12,000 to 15,000 personnel would be carefully selected, expertly trained, and coherently organized and commanded, it would not fail in its mission due to lack of skills, equipment, cohesiveness, experience in resolving conflicts, or gender, national, or religious imbalance. Because it would be an integrated service encompassing civilian, police, judicial, and military personnel prepared to conduct multiple functions in diverse UN operations, it would not suffer for lack of components essential to peace operations or from confusion about the chain of command. By providing a wide range of functions, the UN Emergency Peace Service would, for the first time in history, offer a rapid, comprehensive, internationally legitimate response to crisis.

THE PLAN OF ACTION:

Because governments have not created the necessary UN capability for an Emergency Peace Service, the responsibility now lies with civil society, working with allies in the UN and interested governments. To create this service, a number of citizens' organizations and leaders of civil society are determined to: (1) identify interested parties throughout the world; (2) secure agreement on the principles, composition, and financing of a UN Emergency Peace Service; (3) draw on expert knowledge to spread information and strategy regarding the establishment of an emergency peace service; (4) expand and develop a well-organized network of support that utilizes promotional materials, endorsements, and a speakers' bureau to spread awareness; and (5) encourage dialogue among NGOs, the UN system, and national governments to ensure implementation.

We belong to an emerging international coalition of over 35 organizations such as Human Rights Watch, World Order Models Project, World Federalist Movement (USA), Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (Australia), Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies (USA), Peace Research Center (Spain), Citizens for Global Solutions (USA), Simons Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Research (Canada), Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (USA) Medicina Integral Dhamma (Mexico), EarthAction (USA) and Centre for International Political Studies (South Africa), who endorse and promote the UNEPS initiative. If you or your organization is in support of this much-needed service, please e-mail our international coordinator at coordinator@globalactionpw.org.

Praise for a UN Emergency Peace Service:

“This venture is of the greatest importance both to the UN as a responsible institution and to the millions as of yet unknown, innocent victims who might, in the future, be saved by this essential addition to the UN’s capacity to act on their behalf. There is one overwhelming argument for the United Nations Emergency Peace Service. It is desperately needed, and it is needed as soon as possible.” – Sir Brian Urquhart, Former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Special Political Affairs

“Anyone concerned with preventing a future Rwanda or Darfur should read this book. This is a bold, politically realistic proposal for establishing a rapid deployment force—a United Nations Emergency Peace Service—to prevent genocide and crimes against humanity.” – Juan Mendez, Special Adviser to the United Nations Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide

“The UNEPS initiative directly responds to the widely recognized need to protect people caught in deadly conflicts. While serving as United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, I pleaded on numerous occasions for the rapid deployment of specialized forces. Without such presence, military elements could not be separated in refugee camps; humanitarian corridors were seldom set up to allow the victims safe exits; and all too often, innocent civilians were left in the midst of fighting. Effective, trained and specialized standing forces would have been invaluable.” – Sadako Ogata, Former United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

"The UN has no peace-keeping forces at its disposal. When the Security Council authorizes an intervention in some troubled place, the UN General Secretary faces the difficult and sometimes futile task of pleading with nations to contribute troops for the mission out of their own armed forces. Sometimes nations respond, but sometimes they don't. The availability of adequate forces is usually uncertain, the timeliness of their availability is always dubious, and in any event command and control over them is a questionable proposition due to the unwillingness of the US and other major powers to permit their troops to serve under a UN commander....[In Sierra Leone] the UN was reduced to hastily patching together an ill-led force made up largely of ill-trained, ill-equipped, underpaid soldiers hailing primarily from impoverished third world countries....

A proposed remedy that has come up every now and then ever since the UN was born, but at last may be on the verge of being taken seriously, would establish a standing peace force ready to strike swiftly when ordered into action by the Security Council to restore peace or halt atrocities. This force would not consist of contingents from the armed forces of nations. Instead a well-paid, well-trained volunteer UN force would be created to move in when eruptions of genocide, crimes against humanity, and general break-downs of order occur amidst rising violence like the horrors that appalled the world in Bosnia and Rwanda....Reforms along these general lines would transform the UN into a far more democratic and equitably constituted institution..." -- The late Senator Alan Cranston, The Sovereignty Revolution, Stanford University Press: 2004. Pages 65-66.

"The people and policy makers of the world can continue to be shocked, horrified, outraged and grief- stricken by one genocide after another, or we can take meaningful action to stop the killing...Their plan for a United Nations Emergency Peace Service (UNEPS) is thoughtful, well researched and solid. When implemented, it will create a rapid, comprehensive, internationally legitimate response to acts of genocide and other crises and save millions of lives through preventive action." -- Lois Barber, Executive Director of EarthAction

“With regard to practical tools--if you like the “tool of response”…there are many ideas on the table. But I believe one idea on the table that should be pursued more seriously and discussed within the United Nations, maybe a mandate if need be, is an idea which is being proposed by a very serious group of scholars and organizations. They call this the UN Emergency Peace Service. We can discuss this more fully later; I think this is something that should be debated more seriously so that where there is an actual genocide going on, at an early stage there will be the tool for response which does not depend on individual Member States deciding to send their men and women into harm's way or not to do so.”-Olara Otunnu, former UN Special Representative to the Secretary General for Children and Armed Conflict

"I enthusiastically support the proposal of a UNEPS as a means of preventing genocide.  An emergency peace force should act swiftly and forcefully. For this, it needs the authority of the UN and financial means from the prosperous countries. Also charities and the private sector may see a strong motive for supporting the UNEPS initiative." -Ernst von Weizsäcker, Dean, Bren School, UC Santa Barbara, former Chairman of the Bundestag Committee on Globalization

"Podiumsdiskussion „Zivile Krisenprävention - Sinnvolle Ergänzung zum Militär oder bessere Alternative" mit Botschafter Friedrich Däuble, Krisenbeauftragter des AA, Andreas Zumach, Dr. Detlev Wolter, Ex-Botschaftsrat bei der dt. VN-Vertretung in New York, Barbara Unger, Berghof-Stiftung, dem Sudan-Direktor von World Vision, Renaldo Gordon sowie dem W-V-Experten Ekkehard Forberg. (vgl. www.worldvision.de) Berichtet wird, dass Deutschland wg. des Aktionsplans bei den VN ein hohes Profil habe. Seit 2004 koordinierte Wolter zusammen mit der Schweiz den „Freundeskreis für Krisenprävention" in der VN. Jetzt dürfe nicht nachgelassen werden. Die Schweiz habe von Anfang an ihren Aktionsplan mit ausreichenden Mitteln ausgestattet. Einhellig kritisiert wird die Reduzierung des zivik-Titels im Haushalt des AA (Förderung von zivilgesellschaftlichen Projekten der Zivilen Friedensförderung) von 3 Mio. über 2 Mio. auf 1,65 Mio. Euro in 2007. Insider berichten, dass zzt. bei der Bundeswehr eine größere Dynamik Richtung Ziviler Krisenprävention zu erfahren sei als bei den anderen Ressorts. Anschließend Buchvorstellung Detlev Wolter: „A United Nations for the 21st Century: From Reaction to Prevention", Nomos-Verlag. D. Wolter unterstützt auch die ausgesprochen wichtige Initiative „United Nations Emergency Peace Service"/UNEPS   für einen stehenden Peacekeeping-Verband der VN mit 12.000-15.000 Personen. Die Mitglieder des US-Repräsentantenhauses Albert Wynn (Dem) und James Walsh (Rep) haben dazu eine Resolution eingebracht. Eine internationale Koalition von 35 Organisationen, darunter Human Rights Watch, unterstützt UNEPS. Informationen bei der „Global Action to Prevent War and Armed Conflict"(GAPW)." -Winfried Nachtwei, German MdB and Foreign Policy Spokesperson for the Green Party, March 22, 2007

"The fundamental problem is that the UN has no troops. It has to beg and borrow troops, equipment, transport, and money to mount a peacekeeping force. Big powers, notably the US, are usually chary of pledging more than token support and notoriously tight-fisted in funding peacekeeping operations....There is a better way. The international community should establish a standing force of soldiers and police to respond quickly to humanitarian emergencies. The force, which might be called a rapid reaction force (RRF), would consist of 5,000 to 10,000 elite volunteers from around the world. They would live and train together, follow the same doctrine, use the same equipment, answer to the same chain of command, and be ready for dispatch on 72 hours notice." -Larry Thompson, Former Director of Advocacy at Refugees International. Excerpted from his article "Just What Will it Take to Learn Our Peacekeeping Lesson?" Christian Science Monitor, July 12, 2000

"We are the ones who understand well and support with convincing evidence and testimony why the world needs UNEPS--a United Nations Permanent and Rapid Response to deal with issues of peace and humanitarian relief."
-Cissa wa Numbe, Secretary General, United Nations Association of the Democratic Republic of the Congo

"...if we agreed in advance on an international peacekeeping capability, then they could make a judgment on each of these instances of what is required in the way of an appropriate response. It's the same way we deal with domestic quarrels -- we have a trained police force that's in being and ready to respond to violations of the law or disturbances of the peace and we need the same thing internationally...It wouldn't have to be huge, but it would have to be well-trained and well-equipped and with the authority to move."
- U.S. Ambassador George McGovern, in an interview by the UN wire, December 11, 2000