>> what's the role of human peacekeepers, the democratic republic of congo has as the you and to withdraw its troops saying it failed to protect civilians. what's the alternative and will this pave the way for private armies to take over? this is inside story. hello and welcome to the program. united nations peacekeeping mission has been around for more than 60 years.

in that time, it has helped many countries transition from conflict to peace and stability. it's troops are deployed by member states and numbers of the tens and thousands but there's a push back against the blue helmets, especially in africa or some host nation say they've lost confidence in their mission. democratic republic of congo is among those calling for their withdrawal of who have already sent them packing. could xa peacekeeping needs reform while others say it does important work despite its shortcomings. we will get the thoughts of our guests in a moment, but first, this report. >> human peacekeepers have been deployed to democratic republic of congo for a quarter of a century. a large part of the mandate is to protect civilians from armed groups. but the president said they failed in their mission and wants them gone. >> it is to be deplored that the peacekeeping missions employed fruit 25 years in the democratic republic of congo have failed to cope with the armed conflicts that are tearing apart the

region, nor to protect the civilian population. >> many civilians in drc feel the same way. this month protesters demanded the peacekeepers go. they accused the u.n. of doing little to protect them. the army cleared demonstrations, 43 people were killed. u.n. peacekeepers have worn out their welcome elsewhere. it was in 2021 at the urging of the governments. and molly has become one of the latest countries to demand they pull out. the u.n. has admitted to shortcomings but says without peacekeepers, things would be worse. >> growing divisions among member states with the complexities of today's conflicts poses a for medical challenge to peacekeeping in a broader task of maintaining decent security. i encourage you to consider the alternative and to imagine how these situations would people -- would evolve if peacekeepers were not present to undertake these efforts. >> in many places, mercenaries are filling the void, including

those from russia's group. as criticism of u.n. peacekeeping grows, critics say reforms are needed in order to overcome this crisis of confidence. ♪ >> let's bring in our guest. in new york, the executive director director at the institute and former special advisor to the president. in london, founder and executive director at africa risk consulting. in geneva, a former u.n. resident and him and it's eerie and coordinator for sudan. a warm welcome to you all and things for joining us today on inside story. let me start with you today. drc is set to begin discussions with you and authorities for an accelerated withdrawal of u.n. peacekeepers from december, 2024 to december 2023. i want to get your impressions as far as what you think is a realistic timeline.

>> why not? it's a year, so i think they can do it, and i don't think it will make much difference to the situation on the ground. if they were to leave months early. >> let me ask you, u.n. peacekeeping missions in africa are coming under a lot of criticism. you have experience as a you in peacekeeper in sudan. our u.n. peacekeeping missions actually working anymore? >> they used to work when they were part of a much more comprehensive operation, which took the piece and built the piece. but in recent decades, they have become fragmented. they have not been as well resourced as they need to. and we live in a much more -- world where the troops providing the peacekeepers in the nations funding them are at the long end. so there are more and more ineffective and i think they should be put out of their misery.

wakes u.n. peacekeepers have also worn out their welcome in other places, they have left sudan's region in 2020 at the urging of the government. molly is the latest country to demand a pullout. i want to ask you what you think will happen in molly once peacekeepers pullout? >> thank you so much. since the decision to withdraw the mission, we are still having a lot of things going on. as you mentioned, we have different realities according to countries and according to context also. the u.n. mission was occupying the areas where the different rebel groups now or a part of the peace agreement in the government. so now, occupying the barracks after the administration has carried problems in the field, then the reality of what it was bringing to the peace and

instability in the country. >> let me ask you, from your vantage point, what exactly is the alternative here? if peacekeepers continue to pull out, will that pave the way potentially for private armies to take over more and more? who fills the void in this instance? >> before even the mission starts withdrawing, the government and the authorities start recruiting a lot of military personals as we have seen in the past couple of months, but the problem itself is a question of the presence of the u.n. keeping missions. because, since the beginning, with the mandate of 2100, it starts changing, and the objective also starts changing. finally, they just realize it is not necessarily -- necessary to

have 15,000 people on the ground, and not even starting what people expect from this mission. so, filling the gap by themselves by the transition in the army is a one point, also different partners as they say it, and some say the groups say the russian institute is finally filling this gap, please instant -- empty spaces. >> i want to speak more specifically about u.n. peacekeepers in the drc. the presidents of the une -- in drc has become increasingly unpopular. critics say that's due to a failure of u.n. peacekeepers to protect civilians from violence. earlier this month protesters demanded the peacekeepers go. they have accuse the u.n. of doing little to protect them. the army cleared demonstrations, dozens of people were killed. what is the current level of anger about the presence of u.n.

peacekeepers, and how exactly did we get to this point? >> i think the levels of anger are pretty high. and it has led to this call for rapid withdrawal. i think we have to look at where we got to and how this came about. if we look at the origins of the mission to congo, it was at a very particular time. when the country was actually imploding. there was a significant risk that it would split apart. but definitely, over the years that the u.n. has been there, its ability to actually deal and to improve the security for civilians has been severely impaired. it's also, the terrain is impossible, the region is largely pretty much from a military point of view, largely

ungovernable. because of its vast size, because of the infrastructure, and also because of the, i think there is also a lack of willingness amongst -- a lack of commitment to really deal with the massive problems that the eastern congo faces. i mean, without actually ever having -- when you haven't been there, as i have, it is extraordinary to think about the vast size of the area that they u.n. force is meant to govern. it's in possible. >> i want to follow-up with you and ask the fact that the u.n. has admitted to shortcomings, but they've also said that without peacekeepers in these areas, things would be worse. what do you say to that? >> i think that's possibly true, but they are going to be replaced, as far as i understand it, by a regional force of

military from the region. and i don't think they will necessarily fare any better, and the real risk is that you will get much more profiteering, as we saw before the u.n. force came in, because you are talking also about an area that has enormous mineral wealth that many region no players in many countries have a great deal of interest in, that's gold, cobalt, further south in drc, copper. so, one has to guard against that. but i think this also comes into a political context, a geopolitical context that we hate -- that we have to take into account, that is where african leadership is seeking african solutions for african problems. so, the u.n. departure from mali, congo and replacement with

local forces and regional forces seems to me to be the next step. >> there are analysts and experts have blamed the lack of success in africa on the operational mandates on the missions in africa and they said that those mandates restrict the forces activity. what do you say to that? >> this is actually a really great question and understanding the narrative around the u.n. missions as well. as my colleague just mentioned about what happened in the congo, from your question, the same thing happened back in the days where mission personal work involved a lot of scandals, including sexual scandals, and also the context reality. so that made people wonder a lot of questions, why these guys are here, even though they are not

bringing in new added value to the conflict and to calm the fire. it was really not understood at all. and even the definition of why these 15,000 people, more than that, but 15,000, 200 something where there. but were not enough to bring whatever we expect from them. in terms of opposition, destabilization of cities, the training of the national forces. but the past couple of months before the mission was in -- the u.n. mission was investing much more money and resources on development areas then peacekeeping. so, we already know the u.n. has already agencies focusing on these areas, as also the government and local connectivity's are working to do the same. so now, is the money going

through these areas, or are they really going through the peacekeeping mission? these are very complex and the narrative around what's going on in other societies about the mission for when you take a certain part of the world, what the mission is like for decades, and what it could bring in a conversation in these countries. >> in his answer he brought up one of the points that i wanted to ask you about, and that's about the fact that peacekeeping forces have also been accused in the passive committing human rights abuses, including pervasive allegations of sexual abuse annexed with tatian. there have been u.n. investigations into these allegations, but they really lead to prosecutions. how much scandals like that tainted these peacekeeping missions? >> i think scandals like that and the impunity that comes after that, has certainly

brought a battering to such operations. the soldiers come from many different countries and the processes of accountability and justice take place in those countries. but very often the countries are ashamed of what happened, they are in paris, they protect their own kind and they get the blame for that. i blame not the u.n., but i blame the country from which the peacekeepers come. how come it contributed forces are ill disciplined. it deserved to be blamed. but when the soldiers of the countries make these kinds of abuses, it's difficult to know who's worse than that. so it goes to those countries as to why they allow these soldiers

ill paid, ill disciplined, ill mannered soldiers to take part in these sensitive operations. >> there is still a criticism by many that say whether or not it's local forces who may be committing those crimes, they do say, and they blame the u.n. for not doing enough to make sure that the people are actually being put on trial. they say there's very little accountability. what you say to that? >> from my time in the u.n. system and a number of different positions, the u.n. has tried. the u.n. has made representations to the countries who commit the crime. do you end doesn't have a court sitting in new york to be able to do these kinds of things. it is true that sometimes the u.n. leadership, often the u.n. leadership from your secretary-general downward is -- in terms of saying to countries, which are misbehaving, that they

should not do that. there are not sanctions i could be deployed against those countries. no more peacekeepers from those countries. it is true to know longer deployed. or search in unix from certain countries will no longer be deployed and that's a very good thing. that's the accountability. it's not just unique, it's part of a general climate. it affects many, many other areas in relation to the security. we have the standard in drc and the pandemic where they are asking for sex in return for jobs in organizations. in that sense, many took a bigger view and they look at where it lies. it's easy to blame the u.n.

central command, but they don't have the means in their disposal. >> it looked like you were reacting to quite a bit of what was spend said there, i wanted to give you an opportunity. >> i think there is a question of accountability that goes back to the original financing. it goes back to financing these operations where, to some extent you've got the global north as it has become known, really funding global -- because most of the financing comes from very wealthy g-7 countries to finance countries, poorer countries, troops to be actually leading these peacekeeping operations. whereas, what you really want for peacekeeping operations is professionally trained peacekeeping operations that just do that. so i think the financing,

staffing, the training and the operations all need to face reform. this being u.n. peacekeeping forces being asked to leave as a crisis in confidence in the u.n. play you have got this norther inner financing from the global north troops from the emerging market countries in third countries where they perhaps don't have the tools of the training or the equipment. and certainly in eastern congo, the infrastructure is just not there. the ability to protect people requires much more aerial capacity, and that's enormously expensive and very difficult to run. so, i think a lot of reform is required without throwing out

the u.n. piece keeping missions. i think they just need upgrading, perhaps. >> i want to shift focus here little bit to something that was brought up a little bit earlier in the show. in many places where you and peacekeepers have either left or are considering leaving mercenaries are filling the void. we are talking about everybody from russia's group to other groups as well. wagner has worked for governors and militaries and central african republic. libya, mali, sudan, fighting rebel groups there. what is the outlook if this continues? >> there is the instability of these soldiers and how to take them out. i completely disagree with this. the u.n. nations are not very normal nations.

they are supposed to be high missions our countries. we see them as invention of services. imagine you have already a very loyal government standing, the government is not falling, the government stays in answer helps. it creates a system that prevents them to attack. there was no reveals after the signature of this. the former rebel groups are no longer inflate. fighting the government are terrorist groups. the question is, why they stayed in the city with the civilians in the same area where they're

attacking and pushing and pressuring. even they are attacked in their own barracks. this is a point we should learn from it moving forward if we want that mission to go for a. it's not just about the countries providing, but it is a global organization to maintain and also protect civilians all around the world. the other parts of the world. it is when they accept to send them in the field. is that about ethical document. it's also about following up. you should have producers and protocol to make justices every single decision.

it's against the personal in the field, so how can you imagine them in the field to make justice for themselves. and it's happening in new york city. they are selecting people and they are keeping or engage what is about the terrorist groups. >> i'm sorry to interrupt you, i will get back to you with my original question in a minute. but i do see him reacting to what you are saying. >> it's great in an ideal world, but we have to understand that the peacekeepers have diplomatic immunity. it committed the being and bring them to new york and put them up.

there is no prism, there is no process. we must not let the countries get away with this. the fact is that many developing countries use the contributions as a way of using -- earning revenue. they are subsidizing the forces back home, other peacekeepers are sent because they come sometimes. it's not just safer, but it somewhere else rather than creating mayhem. this is entirely a matter of the u.n. behaving in an irresponsible manner. may be we need international codes. in terms of disciplining these

people. that's why i think quite honestly, we're moving into regional peacekeeping. >> am saido -- i'm sorry to interrupt you but we don't have a lot of time in it -- time left. i see you want to jump in. i will get you in a minute. i do still want to ask you, which is, what will the implications be if we start seeing more of these mercenary groups, these private armies going into these countries? >> people are looking for solutions. it could be private armies, it could be various different groups are countries that are in help or even higher mercenaries from different places. but now, when the yuan in international mission failed, people and countries have to

look for this because we cannot sit and look at people dying. but the problem with this is they don't report to anybody. so whatever happens in the field, you might abuse situations. to whom we can report the civilians, who do we report to? no one, this is a very dangerous situation. in the day these mercenary groups are returned against the person to be complying them. and this is about business, this is not about human rights, this is not about humanity, this is 100% money related. so, the day you will not be able to pay them, or the day you will not be the same, maybe you can return the next six shuai. that's why you have the implication of russia. the minister, he himself said

they are operating in this field and in for this government. >> i'm sorry to cut you off again, but just have a couple minutes left, i know tara wants to jump in. i want to ask you about a point he was raising, there has been a lot of debate as to what laws cover private armies, and this private armies and mercenary groups can actually be held to account when and if their fighters commit crimes. this is a real growing concern, right? >> they largely govern themselves. as we have seen, and we only have to look at recent, not-too-distant history, if you look at sierra leone, the private military companies that got involved there. in my view, they actually accelerated. they increase the conflict because their main interest was to actually get paid, as was

said earlier, to get paid either in diamonds, and we have the whole lead diamonds debacle. so, it's definitely, and now we also see that the mercenaries were actually seeking how they were going to be paid, putting pressure on the various -- various military contests that have emerged to be paid directly , either in concessions or in gold. the commercial element, the lack of accountability, and also the ineffectiveness we saw that the group failed completely. and it was in northern mozambique, and what was required was a regional single country intervention by rwanda, military single country intervention to restore. the effectiveness --

>> i do apologize, we have run out of time, so we will have to leave the conversation there. thanks to all of our guests. thank you too for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website, al jazeera.com. for further discussion go to our facebook page. you can also join the conversation on xp or our handle is at a.j. inside story. goodbye for now. ♪

♪ eric campbell: germany is letting go of coal. europe's biggest economy has closed its black coal mines without sacking a single worker. now it's phasing out the brown coal it burns for electricity. but climate activists say it's still not enough. we find out why a country built on coal believes coal's days are numbered. and we join a raid with young activists fighting to stop