« COIN and selection effects | Main | More on UN Peacekeeping Contributions »

Soon there will be 100,000 UN Peacekeepers

As of January 2010, there were 99,943 UN peacekeepers active in 15 missions around the world. This is a record as the graph below shows (from globalpolicy.org).

peacekeepers.jpg

The resurgence of UN peacekeeping after 1999 has been a bit under the radar screen. Below are the major troop contributors. Funny list, no? The UN reimburses a standard rate per soldier regardless of country of origin, making participation relatively attractive to poorer countries. There are also some interesting competitive regional dynamics going on in South Asia. Many of these countries have internal security problems. I bet someone at the Pentagon has looked at this list and wondered why Pakistan doesn’t use these 10,826 soldiers to go after the Taliban. Also notice China in the top 15, as the only P-5 member. That’s a very novel development. The U.S. isn’t in there but the US military does provide essential support to various peacekeeping missions. 96 peacekeepers have been killed already this year. Wonder why Western democracies aren’t high on the list?

Update: Here is more analysis of who sends troops by my friend and former colleague Jim Lebovic and a more recent paper by Richard Perkins and Eric Neumayer. They find that democracies are more likely to contribute and that states are more likely to contribute to missions in the same region or in a former colony.

troopcontributors.jpg

Comments

I heard (in a talk by whom I can’t remember) that countries are well compensated for sending peacekeeping troops. That could explain the distribution, in part.

Erik:

You write, “I bet someone at the Pentagon has looked at this list and wondered why Pakistan doesn’t use these 10,826 soldiers to go after the Taliban.”

I’m confused here, or maybe you’re joking? Pakistan has a lot more than 10,000 soldiers, right?

Andrew:

This was tongue-in-cheek. Of course, Pakistan has more than 10,000 soldiers but you would still wonder why it seems like so many states with internal security issues are willing to contribure presumably scarce resources to international missions (Pakistan has been the top contributor for years). Perhaps these aren’t scarce resources in that these states create excess capacity or it could be that these militaries use peacekeeping as part of the argument to increase the size of the military. Anyway, this post was mostly meant not to explain but just to note the trend and distribution, which I talked about with my students yesterday and I thought would be interesting to a wider audience given that it rarely makes the front pages these days.