Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defence forces Deployment to UNDOF

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Come-quickly View Post
    Would it be Brigade Mobile Reserve by any chance?

    From what I've read online it looks like the force might be around that scale.
    It does not really matter if its a BMR/FMR etc if the entire UNDOF does not have or is not part of a" political strategy" then it will not have the mandate or the willingness to protect itself, The troops will be put in unnecessary danger.
    As regards UNTSO , YES I am aware that its HQ is in Jerusalem and on a daily basis u will find guys from UNDOF there in their so many varieties of uniforms.
    As regards the general UN thing, Yes the bigger countries have used and abused it but even when operations are not UN such as the Multi National Force in Beirut , they also got taken out and are often unable to defend themselves , again because often there is no political plan , sending in troops is the only thing they can think of, its posturing. THE multi national force , none of them knew why they were there and they became part of the problem. Oh by the way there was a British contingent and they left so hurriedly that they left an armored car behind they were in such a hurry to leave.
    As regards Rwanda and the failure of the UN . It was not an entirely UN affair. The Canadian General had asked begged for more assistance , Kofi Annan , who was then Head of DPKO did nothing except BLAH and the countries/ organizations who could have done something , US, USSR, UK, NATO, AU did nothing, --memories of black hawk down etc. France well it was part of it. It could have been stopped by a Batt or two of aggressive well trained troops with the authority to knock heads if necessary could have been shipped in . As was the eventual case in Liberia. The irish were well armed , the potential “enemy “ had limited capacity and could be dealt with if necessary
    I went in to Rwanda in May/ June 1994 from the TZ side , pvt job, lightly armed with a few” locals” from East Africa, looking for a group of foreigners with whom no contact had been made for some time. We managed to survive by being assertive, having good local knowledge assets with us , being armed so as we could defend ourselves but most importantly having a defined mission. We got in did the job and got out, If someone and there were loads of undisciplined, ganja , waraigi headed groups running around threatened us or wanted to take us on they knew that we would have taken them out as quickly as possible with no need to consult with any extended chain of command. So we survived, two weeks and then out..
    Now back on topic,
    The UNDOF mission is unnecessary and I see no national or even regional or international interest being served in putting Irish troops . Its just political posturing. Israel and probably the US are arming some and not others of the rebels in Syria.
    As for the “ effectiveness “ of UNIFIL.
    I am sure it does some good local work and provide a boost to the local economy but what exactly does or can it achieve in such a situation, and I will not say anymore in respect for the guys who were injured or killed there. Israel accuses it of acting as a screen for Hizbollah to arm itself, THE Leb army is a hotpotch of militias . ???

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by BANDIT View Post
      It does not really matter if its a BMR/FMR etc if the entire UNDOF does not have or is not part of a" political strategy" then it will not have the mandate or the willingness to protect itself, The troops will be put in unnecessary danger.
      The more modern mandates detail the mission more explicitly but mandate is to prevent fighting between Syria and Israel (not between parties to the Syrian Civil War), however part of this is to prevent belligerents (Israeli or Syrian (from either side in the Civil War)) from ending or putting equipment in the AO - the reason being to prevent conflict between Israel and Syria.

      I don't know what the ROE is.

      As regards the general UN thing, Yes the bigger countries have used and abused it but even when operations are not UN such as the Multi National Force in Beirut , they also got taken out and are often unable to defend themselves , again because often there is no political plan , sending in troops is the only thing they can think of, its posturing. THE multi national force , none of them knew why they were there and they became part of the problem. Oh by the way there was a British contingent and they left so hurriedly that they left an armored car behind they were in such a hurry to leave.
      I suppose it is down to C2 and a clear statement of the mission.

      As regards Rwanda and the failure of the UN . It was not an entirely UN affair. The Canadian General had asked begged for more assistance , Kofi Annan , who was then Head of DPKO did nothing except BLAH and the countries/ organizations who could have done something , US, USSR, UK, NATO, AU did nothing, --memories of black hawk down etc. France well it was part of it.
      The UN has to rely on the member states to provide troops. If they don't/won't that is not necessarily the fault of the UN.

      The Canadian FC sent the same request to his own national CoC and got BLAH as well!

      The French arguably took sides in the Civil War.

      It could have been stopped by a Batt or two of aggressive well trained troops with the authority to knock heads if necessary could have been shipped in .
      Defintiely.... but no member state was willing to provide them!


      The UNDOF mission is unnecessary and I see no national or even regional or international interest being served in putting Irish troops . Its just political posturing. Israel and probably the US are arming some and not others of the rebels in Syria.
      Ireland has a history of deploying on UN ops not for national interests, which is why they have been welcoming in so many places.

      So it doesn't matter regionally or internationally, if the either side of the Civil War or the Israelis decide to attack each other and spread even more violence and even more innocent civilians are killed or displaced?
      Israel accuses it of acting as a screen for Hizbollah to arm itself,
      It makes that accusation because it suits them - they are a party to the conflict!

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by DeV View Post
        Which means that if one of the 5 wants a Chapter VI instead of a Chapter VII that means we get a Chapter VI, if they don't want a mission there is no mission. It also means the non-permanent UNSC members can be influenced by them.



        What was UNPROFOR's mandate? Allow delivery of aid, who's fault was that?

        When the mandate was changed and SFOR came to be troops, heavy armour and artillery from the super powers flooded in before that NATO air power was in the main ineffectional.
        Tha UNPROFOR mandate was in the name: Protection Force. That is not what we did in Srebrenica; our Troops were left with orders not to intervene while thousands of men were massacred and countless women raped. UNPROFOR counted close to 40 000 Troops, yet was unable to carry out it's mandate. NATO airpower was ineffective because it was under UN command...

        IFOR was deployed under a UNSC resolution, with a renewed mandate; are you telling me that the UNSC voted differently for NATO Troops then they did for UN Troops ? It makes no sense; it's the same people, from the same org, voting to deploy forces (or to change the change of command of Troops already in theater). But the UN could not organize an orgy in a whorehouse...
        "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

        Never give up!!"

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Jungle View Post
          Tha UNPROFOR mandate was in the name: Protection Force. That is not what we did in Srebrenica; our Troops were left with orders not to intervene while thousands of men were massacred and countless women raped. UNPROFOR counted close to 40 000 Troops, yet was unable to carry out it's mandate. NATO airpower was ineffective because it was under UN command...

          IFOR was deployed under a UNSC resolution, with a renewed mandate; are you telling me that the UNSC voted differently for NATO Troops then they did for UN Troops ? It makes no sense; it's the same people, from the same org, voting to deploy forces (or to change the change of command of Troops already in theater). But the UN could not organize an orgy in a whorehouse...
          UNPROFOR's first mandate came into force in February 1992 and covered Croatia only. Later in June it was amended to include securing Sarajevo Airport and delivery of aid to Bosnia. The first UNPAs in Bosnia were created in April 1993.

          It took another 2 years and more importantly the Dayton Accords to create IFOR!

          The NATO NFZ was also leaky and it was nothing to do with ROE!

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
            Two.
            Trooper Patrick Mullins and Private Kevin Joyce.
            your right but taught the lads were on about unifil

            Comment


            • #96
              Crosspost from the Dail thread.

              Proposed Deployment of the Permanent Defence Force to UNDOF:

              Motion
              Minister of State at the Department of Defence(Deputy Paul Kehoe): I move:

              That Dáil Éireann approves the despatch, pursuant to section 2 of the Defence(Amendment)
              (No. 2) Act 1960, as applied by section 2 of the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, of a contingent
              of the Permanent Defence Force for service as part of the United Nations Disengagement
              Observer Force (UNDOF) in Syria, established under United Nations Security
              Council Resolution 350 (1974) of 31st May, 1974 and extended in subsequent Resolutions,
              most recently through Resolution 2108 (2013) and subject to renewal of the UN mandate/
              authority for UNDOF thereafter.”

              May I share my time with the Tánaiste, Deputy Gilmore?
              An Ceann Comhairle: You may.

              Deputy Paul Kehoe: I propose to introduce the motion and provide some brief information
              on the reasons the Government is responding positively to the United Nations request to provide
              a contingent of the Permanent Defence Force to the United Nations Disengagement Observer
              Force, UNDOF. On 16 July 2013, the Government authorised the Minister for Defence
              to arrange for the despatch of a contingent of the Permanent Defence Force, for a period of one
              year, for service with UNDOF, and to move the necessary enabling resolution in Dáil Éireann.

              In commending the motion to the House, I would like to thank the House for the opportunity
              to briefly outline the background to UNDOF and to the UN request to Ireland for support in enhancing
              the capabilities of UNDOF to continue implementing its mandate. The United Nations
              Disengagement Observer Force, UNDOF, was established on 31 May 1974 by the United Nations
              Security Council Resolution 350 (1974). The force was established following the agreed
              disengagement of the Israeli and Syrian forces in the Golan Heights in May 1974. Since 1974,
              the mandate of UNDOF has been renewed every six months, most recently on 27 June 2013.
              UNDOF supervises the implementation of the disengagement agreement, maintaining an
              area of separation between the forces which is over 75 km long. While the area of separation
              is governed and policed by the Syrian authorities, no military forces other than UNDOF are
              permitted within it. UNDOF remains an important element in ensuring some level of stability
              in the region.

              The escalation of the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic has significantly and adversely
              affected the UNDOF area of operations in recent months. The armed forces of the Syrian
              Arab Republic have deployed and carried out military activities and security operations in the
              UNDOF area of operations. This is a violation of the 1974 disengagement agreement. There
              has also been an increase in the number of incidents involving United Nations personnel on
              the ground. The safety and security of UNDOF personnel and Observer Group Golan military
              observers remains essential for enabling UNDOF to continue to implement its mandate under
              these difficult conditions. Given the deteriorating security situation, the mission has had to
              reconfigure its operations so as to ensure the safety of personnel while continuing to implement
              the mission’s mandate.

              The UN Secretary General has called on all parties to the Syrian domestic conflict to cease
              military actions throughout the country, including in the UNDOF area of operations. On 6 June
              2013, the Government of Austria announced its decision to withdraw its contingent of 341 personnel
              from UNDOF. This followed extensive fighting between Syrian armed forces and opposition
              forces around the area where the Austrians were based. The withdrawal, to be completed
              on 31 July 2013, has significantly affected the efforts of UNDOF to continue to implement its
              mandate. Austria has been a long-standing troop-contributing country, of almost 40 years, to
              UNDOF. The United Nations has approached a range of member states in an effort to urgently
              identify additional contributions from former and new contributors to UNDOF. Fiji, India and
              Nepal are understood to be sending troops.

              On 1 July 2013, Ireland received a request from the UN to consider contributing a mechanised
              infantry company as a Force Mobile Reserve to UNDOF. The concept is to provide a
              mobile, protected and capable independent company to undertake reinforcement, reaction, escort and other operations throughout UNDOF’s area of responsibility. The UN has requested
              that the Force Reserve Company should be available for deployment by 1 August 2013 and be
              deployed no later than 1 September 2013.

              The mandate for the UNDOF mission was developed in a very different security situation
              to that which pertains today. The mandate provides for the policing of a voluntary ceasefire
              and separation agreement between two sovereign states which had full control and were secure
              within their territorial boundaries. The separation agreement, on which the mandate is based,
              did not contemplate the current volatile environment and internal conflict in Syria and the threat
              this poses to UNDOF personnel or to the local population. As such, it is vital that the mission
              be reinforced with additional and more robust capabilities so as it can continue to discharge its
              important mandate in this troubled region and in the current difficult circumstances.
              The deployment of the Force Mobile Reserve from the Defence Forces will significantly
              enhance the capability of the UNDOF mission and the protection of UNDOF personnel. The
              Chief of Staff has advised that the tasks outlined for the Force Mobile Reserve are within the
              means and capabilities of the proposed Defence Forces contingent. Having considered all the
              risks and threats associated with the proposed deployment, the Chief of Staff has advised the
              Minister, Deputy Shatter, that he is satisfied that the proposed Defence Forces contingent, operating
              within the numbers and the weapons constraints imposed by the UN, have the capability
              to operate effectively as a Force Reserve to UNDOF and discharge the mandate. He has recommended
              the deployment of a Defence Forces contingent, as proposed by the UN, subject to
              confirmation of the situation on the ground by an operational reconnaissance, to be undertaken
              later next week.

              The overall threat to Defence Forces personnel on the Golan Heights and within the UNDOF
              area of responsibility is assessed as substantial. This is similar to some other theatres in
              which the Defence Forces are currently deployed.

              Following the Defence Forces operational reconnaissance in the mission area, my colleague,
              the Minister for Defence will consider detailed threat assessments from the Defence Forces to
              ensure the security of personnel before any deployment to UNDOF. Subject to Dáil approval, it
              is proposed to deploy a force reserve company which will primarily be deployed and operate on
              the Syrian side of the UNDOF area of responsibility. The company will consist of a headquarters
              commanded by a lieutenant colonel, two mechanised infantry platoons, one reconnaissance
              section and a logistics group including a forward medical team. The final organisational configuration
              of the Defence Forces contingent to UNDOF will be determined following a detailed
              reconnaissance by a Defence Forces team to the mission area. If participation in UNDOF is
              approved, initial deployment will be for one year, subject to the renewal of the mandate. The
              Minister for Defence estimates that the additional costs of deployment and sustainment in 2013
              will be approximately €2 million and the additional cost for a full year will be approximately €5
              million. Approximately three quarters of this will be recoverable from the UN. The Minister
              for Defence is satisfied that the costs of the mission can be absorbed for the balance of the current
              year. The costs for 2014 will have to be addressed as part of the Estimates process.
              The Government has approved participation in UNDOF, which remains an important element
              in ensuring there is a level of stability in this region. The proposal to deploy Defence
              Forces personnel to the mission is supportive of Ireland’s ongoing obligations to international
              peace and security and the Government’s commitment to maintaining the Defence Forces capabilities
              in international operations. Like my colleague, the Minister for Defence, Deputy Shatter, I am confident that the Defence Forces will play a real and substantive role in supporting
              the UN’s efforts to enhance the capabilities of UNDOF. The deployment of the force mobile
              reserve will help to ensure the mission can continue to implement its mandate. I believe the
              Defence Forces contingent can make an important contribution to the success of the UNDOF
              mission, as the Defence Forces have done throughout the world on many occasions in the past.
              I commend the motion to the House.
              "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

              "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

              Comment


              • #97
                Highlights:

                On 1 July 2013, Ireland received a request from the UN to consider contributing a mechanised
                infantry company as a Force Mobile Reserve to UNDOF.

                The concept is to provide a
                mobile, protected and capable independent company
                to undertake reinforcement, reaction, escort and other operations throughout UNDOF’s area of responsibility.

                The UN has requested
                that the Force Reserve Company should be available for deployment by 1 August 2013 and be
                deployed no later than 1 September 2013.




                He has recommended
                the deployment of a Defence Forces contingent, as proposed by the UN, subject to
                confirmation of the situation on the ground by an operational reconnaissance, to be undertaken
                later next week.

                The overall threat to Defence Forces personnel on the Golan Heights and within the UNDOF
                area of responsibility is assessed as substantial. This is similar to some other theatres in
                which the Defence Forces are currently deployed.

                Following the Defence Forces operational reconnaissance in the mission area, my colleague,
                the Minister for Defence will consider detailed threat assessments from the Defence Forces to
                ensure the security of personnel before any deployment to UNDOF.

                Subject to Dáil approval, it
                is proposed to deploy a force reserve company which will primarily be deployed and operate on
                the Syrian side of the UNDOF area of responsibility.

                The company will consist of a headquarters
                commanded by a lieutenant colonel, two mechanised infantry platoons, one reconnaissance
                section and a logistics group including a forward medical team
                .

                The final organisational configuration
                of the Defence Forces contingent to UNDOF will be determined following a detailed
                reconnaissance by a Defence Forces team to the mission area. If participation in UNDOF is
                approved, initial deployment will be for one year, subject to the renewal of the mandate.
                "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

                "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Jungle View Post
                  The permanent members of the UNSC do not control the UN; they have veto powers. Most western countries have become indifferent to UN peacekeeping missions, because they are mostly irrelevant.

                  Our last experiences with large UN PK deployments, UNPROFOR and RWANDA, ended in disasters. In the case of Rwanda, that country was abandoned because the UN was incapable of reacting with the needed muscle; in the case of Bosnia, a NATO force came to the rescue and saved the country from self-destructing.
                  We now have a platoon with the Brazilian Battalion in Haiti, at Brazil's request, because they worked with us in 2010 after the earthquake, and specifically requested R22R Troops (Vandoos) to work with them.

                  Maybe we will return to large UN peacekeeping deployments sometime in the future, but hopefully we will wait until the org unfocks itself. Or something new replaces it.
                  Good post, but one correction, It was America that came to the rescue in Bosnia, NATO Europe was to wimpy to move without it.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    UNPROFOR's first mandate came into force in February 1992 and covered Croatia only. Later in June it was amended to include securing Sarajevo Airport and delivery of aid to Bosnia. The first UNPAs in Bosnia were created in April 1993.

                    It took another 2 years and more importantly the Dayton Accords to create IFOR!

                    The NATO NFZ was also leaky and it was nothing to do with ROE!
                    Dude, I don't need the history lessons... nothing to do with ROEs ??

                    Check out this quote:

                    The Dutch state, which has faced several cases in recent years over Srebrenica, has always argued that it was let down by the UN, which failed to give its troops sufficient support.
                    From this article: Dutch state 'responsible for three Srebrenica deaths

                    We suffered the same problem in early 1995 during the Serb offensive in Krajina; the Croats ordered our 2nd Batt (R22R) to abandon their positions and surrender. The CO refused, but was eventually ordered by the UN CoC to not resist and obey Croat orders. Our guys ended up hostages, our kit and some weapons were seized, and some of our vehs were used in ops by the Croats.

                    The UN failed us, too, on a few occasions. That is why some countries have given up on large UN peacekeeping ops; Irish forces are not immune to this kind of thing happening in the future.
                    Last edited by Jungle; 6 August 2013, 15:35.
                    "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

                    Never give up!!"

                    Comment


                    • Anyone got a breakdown of UNDOF establishment with/without the Austrians involved ? I can't get the number to add.
                      "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

                      "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

                      Comment


                      • [QUOTE=Jungle;399628]Dude, I don't need the history lessons... nothing to do with ROEs ??

                        100% agree, the only certainty in life is that the UN will sell you down the river, the UN will fcuk you over and then fukc you over again if it means some UN official with 2 4 x4s gets to look big and get a promotion.

                        I have served with the UN and I have served with PFP/ NATO and NATO take no shit from man woman or child- conditions are better, grub is better and you can bet your bollox that NATO will send the nearest aircraft carrier to your rescue should you need it- where as the UN keeps business hours and wouldn't scratch it's arse for you unless there was a chance of a UN official getting a bigger apartment.

                        The UN have no interest in peacekeeping or its peacekeepers- who here has visited the UN Hq in NY- and you see the exhibits about saving this asshole saving that crud poxy town, giving a fortune to some tyrant in Africa and pretending its food aid etc, yet there is no UN peacekeepers exhibition.

                        I hate the UN just as much as I hate Sinn Fein / ira, both are full of gangsters and both have caused the deaths of civilians and soldiers.
                        Last edited by hedgehog; 6 August 2013, 18:21.
                        Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
                        Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
                        The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
                        The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
                        The best lack all conviction, while the worst
                        Are full of passionate intensity.

                        Comment


                        • Yet we merrily suborned our security policy to them in a classic game of pacifist false morality.

                          Ho hum
                          "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by trellheim View Post
                            Anyone got a breakdown of UNDOF establishment with/without the Austrians involved ? I can't get the number to add.
                            Establishment (Authorised strength in UN speak) is unchanged - 1250

                            30 Jun 13 - 835
                            Austria - 117
                            Fiji - 182
                            India - 193
                            Ireland - 3
                            Philippines - 340

                            31 May 13 - 908
                            Austria - 374
                            India - 193
                            Philippines - 341

                            31 Jan 13 - 1001
                            Austria - 377
                            Croatia - 97
                            India - 195
                            Philippines - 342

                            Comment


                            • [QUOTE=hedgehog;399642]
                              Originally posted by Jungle View Post
                              Dude, I don't need the history lessons... nothing to do with ROEs ??

                              100% agree, the only certainty in life is that the UN will sell you down the river, the UN will fcuk you over and then fukc you over again if it means some UN official with 2 4 x4s gets to look big and get a promotion.

                              I have served with the UN and I have served with PFP/ NATO and NATO take no shit from man woman or child- conditions are better, grub is better and you can bet your bollox that NATO will send the nearest aircraft carrier to your rescue should you need it- where as the UN keeps business hours and wouldn't scratch it's arse for you unless there was a chance of a UN official getting a bigger apartment.

                              The UN have no interest in peacekeeping or its peacekeepers- who here has visited the UN Hq in NY- and you see the exhibits about saving this asshole saving that crud poxy town, giving a fortune to some tyrant in Africa and pretending its food aid etc, yet there is no UN peacekeepers exhibition.

                              I hate the UN just as much as I hate Sinn Fein / ira, both are full of gangsters and both have caused the deaths of civilians and soldiers.
                              Except for the political rant re Sinn Fein I tend to agree ,
                              Another poster mentioned the UN ordering a unit to surrender , The example of the UN and the Dutch etc it is not a very reassuring scenario when troops are going to such a volatile area.

                              Comment


                              • our 30mm are not going .. this makes me sad

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X