No other nation has influenced the practice of UN peacekeeping as much as Pakistan. Having contributed its first unit to peacekeeping operations in the Congo in 1960, since then Pakistan has sent over 235,000 military, police, and civilian personnel in more than 48 peacekeeping operations in over twenty countries. The magnitude of its contribution poses an important question to be explored beyond simple counting of figures: What is behind Pakistan’s commitment in almost seventy years of constantly changing global politics, and how much do we learn about peacekeeping from this long-term practice?
First, institutional stability plays a significant role here. Unlike those nations, where peacekeeping contributions depend on political climate in the country, Pakistani military regards UN mission as one of the standard features of the development of officers’ careers. The creation of Centre for International Peace and Stability at the National University of Sciences and Technology in 2013 has confirmed this approach, making peacekeeping operations a part of career paths of officers. Thus, institutionalization of peacekeeping operations can explain the high ranking of Pakistan among top troop contributors despite the decrease of such contribution from most of Western armies after costly peacekeeping operations of the 1990s.
The human toll of such a commitment has been significant. Pakistani peacekeepers have incurred casualties in some of the world’s riskiest UN operations, such as Somalia in the early 1990s, where a number of soldiers were killed in UNOSOM missions. This adds a layer of complexity to the narrative of peacekeeping being relatively risk-free diplomacy; for countries providing troops to peacekeeping operations, peacekeeping is an activity with its strategic and human costs that cannot be entirely ignored when discussing the issue through the lens of mandating Security Council members, who do not contribute their own troops.
This also brings up the diplomatic side to consider. Continued involvement in peacekeeping has been a source of soft power for Pakistan that it does not have through bilateral relations, especially given the country’s rather tricky regional security situation. This raises the legitimate question of motivation: Is it a genuine adherence to the principles of multilateralism or a political tool in the country’s foreign policy toolbox, or perhaps a combination of the two? The fact that the UN reimburses troop contributing countries, even if per capita sum is quite modest, should not be neglected either
From this experience, we can see that it has not been completely altruistic or completely transactional either. The peacekeeping experience of Pakistan is indicative of the institution’s culture formed over years of service, motivated by tangible rewards and continually proven in the tough situations on the ground. With peacekeeping being scrutinized in terms of consent of the host-state and efficiency of the mission, Pakistan’s experience can be considered a case study.
