UN

Allan said:

My understanding is that the organizations maintain their structure and
composition based on the nation they are pulled from. So, Canadian
peacekeepers follow the standard Canadian TO&E. This makes a certain
amount
of sense, as it's simpler to send whole units (at what level, I'm not
sure,
but I think it's at the regimental level) to a war zone than to send
bits
and pieces.

==> Correct. Though sometimes the force sent resembles bits and pieces.
Other times, there are very small units sent for special purposes (RCMP
for
example...). 

There must be a certain amount of negotiation, but typically for
peacekeeping it's almost entirely ground forces and logistic support for
the
ground forces. There isn't a lot of air support, other than transport. I
think it's up to the forces involved as to what is sent.

==> Often times, the logistics of who can get a force to a site has a
lot to
do with who is on the mission... and the UN can ask for things, but
governments and militaries provide what they can or will...

I know when the US forces were in Somalia they had helicopter support,
but I
think that was based on standard US Army organization. Canada has sent
Special Forces units into war zones, as has the US. A lot depends on the
mission and the area. Typically it's the army, though, that shoulders
the
burden. 

==> Canadian SF have operated all over the Balkans at various times. But
when our "mainforce" (if that isn't an oxymoron up here...) army units
went,
they shipped APCs in to let them truck around in some protection. 

Well, now that's a really good question. Typically units are deployed in
their own nationality groups, but upper echelons can belong to another
nation. For instance, in Rwanda a number of Belgian peacekeepers were
slaughtered by local forces. The commander in chief in Rwanda was a
Canadian.

==> Tends to be that each commander operates under UN ROE _plus_ his own
either from home government or as a product of his own judgement. For
example, the Canadians in Horn of Africa have recently stopped going out
on
the roads due to mine incidents. 

It would depend, I think, on the quality of the troops. Professional
troops,
like the Canadians, would listen to whomever was in charge.

==> Ah, but in charge of them! If the UN commander gave an order that
their
commander did not feel he should follow, and it was important enough,
they'd
probably either refuse the order stating grounds (like their own ROE) or
they'd do things slowly to give channels a chance to sort out the
questionable order. Some UN missions have been plagued by the commander
not
having much real authority. 

 US troops tend to be the "big boy" in the area, and as such tend to be
able
to say, "Hey, I'm here in Somalia. I'm in charge."

==> More particularly, "We won't serve under a non US commander" (well,
we
might think about taking something akin to direction from a Brit or a
Canuck, but that's about it...) 

 In this case, it's not much of a problem. Where you get problems are
with
less professional armies. I remember hearing of an incident where
peacekeepers of a nation I won't mention did not obey orders from
Canadians
in charge.

==> Fairly common by all accounts (one of my buddies trains Peacekeepers
and
does follow up work for the CF and other forces trained by Canada). Lots
of
it doesn't make the media...

 About the worst that could happen to them is getting shipped out of the
area, as punishment is meted out by nation that supplied the forces.
Again,
Canadians have been pretty professional about it. There was an incident
in
Somalia that was covered up, where by a local was beaten to death after
being found inside the compound of the Canadian airborne regiment. When
it
finally came to light the entire regiment was disbanded and the
offenders
were imprisoned.

==> The dumb part being it was entirely forseeable --> I've yet to meet
anyone who knew members or the Airborne Regiment of the time who were
shocked... and as for what the military did, it punished those involved,
NOT
those responsible (the difference being if you had a high rank, you
evaded....). 

So, you're pretty much able to do anything you want. Maybe you might
want a
reaction test involved, somewhere, when one nationality in your UN force
is
activated to represent whether or not they take orders from another
nationality.

==> That would be fair. Or if you want to give UN players some different
situations - give each his own subset ROE which he operates by (perhaps
even
some details hidden from the "commander" of record) and watch the fun!