U.N. Debates the Breadth of a Mission in the Central African Republic

The New York Times March 3, 2014 By Somini Sengupta

UNITED NATIONS – The world is watching: That has been the resounding message of world powers in the face of deadly sectarian strife in the Central African Republic.

Yet how much is the world willing to pay to stanch the killings? That delicate, awkward debate has begun, behind the scenes, at the United Nations.

The secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, on Monday issued his recommendations: up to 10,000 soldiers, plus 1,820 police officers to protect civilians from armed militias, along with a civilian team to rebuild the state machinery, practically from scratch.

The recommendations reflect what senior United Nations officials described as forceful behind-the-scenes lobbying by the Obama administration, eager to keep down the size of the force and its price tag. The senior officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to divulge internal diplomatic discussions, said the original recommendation had been to send 10,500 soldiers.

“We have had to look at what the situation demands, and also the politics of the Council,” one senior official said. The Security Council must authorize any United Nations peacekeeping force, so this proposal is likely to be thrashed out in the Council.

The United States pays about a fourth of the United Nations’ overall peacekeeping budget, which is at a record $8 billion. As one measure of budgetary pressure, the United States this year did not set aside money for the peacekeeping mission in Mali. The American mission to the United Nations did not respond to requests for a comment on Mr. Ban’s proposal.

There is good reason for United States officials to worry about the cost and scope of this mission, said Peter Yeo, executive director of the Better World Campaign, which advocates stronger American ties to the United Nations.

For one thing, the United States also still owes $350 million in back dues for peacekeeping. But the Obama administration also knows that United Nations peacekeeping is far more cost-effective, compared with sending American troops to conflict zones, Mr. Yeo said.

“They see value of peacekeeping and understand it’s a bargain compared to going it alone,” he said. “But with this support does come cost. And the administration is correctly asking the U.N. to tighten its belt, as it should. And it has.”

The Central African Republic would be the third largest peacekeeping operation, after those in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. It would cost an estimated $600 million.

United Nations officials say rebuilding the fragile, poor nation torn by sectarian violence cannot be done cheaply. The country has no functioning court system, and police officers and prison guards have not been paid for months.

Aid agencies had warned for years that the country needed far more development assistance, and had long been neglected by donors.

“It will require quite an investment,” the senior United Nations official said. According to the secretary general’s report, which the Council will consider this week, there will be an emphasis on police officers to enforce law and order and deter the militias that have gone house to house, killing people on the basis of their faith.

American officials had been reluctant in the past to back a peacekeeping mission, saying that they welcomed the deployment of 5,500 African forces, plus 2,000 French soldiers. The European Union has said it would send up to 1,000 troops until a United Nations mission can be established, but those soldiers have yet to arrive.

United Nations officials continue to warn of the risk of genocide. Children have been recruited to fight. Roughly one in five people have fled their homes, and the World Food Program estimates that a majority of the country’s 4.6 million people are eating one meal a day.

In late February, Mr. Ban warned of a de facto partition of the country into Christian and Muslim areas, as he called for an immediate deployment of more troops and money to buy food and fuel for the soldiers already there.