Re: UN civpol

From: "Derek Fulton" <derekfulton@bigpond.com>

> >Sadly it really does depend on situation and rules of engagement. I
for
> >one think its bloody stupid to send military forces into an area to
> >protect a peace and not give them ROE that allow for fire in dire
> >situations where they or 'protectees' are in danger.
>
> The "civpol" are not military personal, but are drawn from police
> forces/services of UN member states. In this case mostly from the
Federal
> and State police services in Australia. This was way before the
> international community finally decided to send in armed troops to
> stabilize the situation.

OTOH... the Australian Department of Veterans Affairs considers service
by unarmed police and certain other non-military organisations in
certain
zones and at certain times as "active war service" when it comes to
war-service
pensions and benefits. e.g. Cyprus at various times, East Timor.

Basically, anywhere where there's a decent chance you'll be shot at.

I know, I helped maintain the software on "Guide to Assessment of Rates