Shooting the messenger

India8217;s contributions over the years to United Nations peacekeeping operations in various parts of the world have been significant as the world community has readily acknowledged. This country has always regarded it very important to participate in UN missions, and has been consistent in its support and remained at its post, as it were, in difficult conditions for years at a stretch. In such a context the abrupt end to India8217;s participation in UNAMSIL, the UN peacekeeping force in Sierra Leone, is bound to be a serious disappointment and to raise many questions. More than that, the circumstances in which the Indian contingent is being withdrawn are disturbing. The premature recall of a contingent as large and crucial to an operation as the one in Sierra Leone is unusual. But New Delhi seems to have been left with little other choice once the UN, apparently responding to demands from Nigeria, asked for the replacement of force commander, Major General Vijay Jetley.

Understandably, the Indian government has tried to avoid embarrassment to the UN by offering a bland explanation for its troop withdrawal and planned a phased pull-out to prevent any sudden disruption of the UN force. But the essential fact is 3000 Indian troops, the second largest contingent, are exiting at a most inconvenient time. Peace remains a distant dream in Sierra Leone, the UN Force urgently needs beefing up and the Security Council has just agreed to enhance the numbers from 13,000 to 20,000. There is even hope, after agreement this week in Pretoria among diamond-producing countries, on ways of preventing so-called conflict diamonds from being traded in international markets. This would cut off the sustenance of the rebels in Sierra Leone. If India chose to quit at this time it must have had strong reasons to do so.

Things seem to have gone seriously wrong at the UN end, starting with the leak of confidential material from the Secretary General8217;s office. The request for the replacement of Jetley sounds like a case of wanting to shoot the bearer of bad tidings: he is alleged several months ago to have alerted the UN to Nigerian troops trading in diamonds and undermining the UN mission. On their part, the Nigerians, who have sent the largest contingent of troops to UNAMSIL, deny the charges. Kofi Annan clearly had a quandary.

It is not obvious why he thought a change of commanders was the answer in this complicated scenario but in the event he did. India certainly did not think it appropriate and acted accordingly. It is an unpleasant situation for all concerned. UNAMSIL will be severely hampered if the differences between its two largest contingents persist. So, on balance, India has probably acted sensibly. Its disapproval has been made known and it has exited diplomatically avoiding further damage to the image of the international body. The Secretary General will no doubt pursue issues raised by India in due course. Meanwhile India must reiterate its commitment to UN peacekeeping and continue to participate in other missions.