Today in Headlines We Thought We Misread: Zimbabwe Sends Peacekeepers To Syria

I learned today (h/t Peter Dörrie) that Zimbabwe is deploying military personnel to the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS).

Know what country’s soldiers you’re definitely not picturing when you hear the term “UN peacekeepers”? That’s right, Zimbabwe.

I would think this was just another item to be filed under “Confusing Choices Made by the International Community in Handling the Syria Crisis” (see, e.g., sending an accused war criminal to head the Arab League observer mission), but Zimbabwe currently has military personnel in the UN missions to Darfur (UNAMID), Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI), and Liberia (UNMIL), and police in South Sudan (UNMISS), Timor-Leste (UNMIT), and Liberia.

The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (a major opposition force in Zimbabwe politics) has called on the United Nations to stop using Zimbabwe’s armed forces in its peacekeeping missions on the grounds that their human rights record renders them unfit for service. The army has most recently been accused of abuses against miners in the Marange diamond fields, while the police are alleged to have beaten and tortured civil society activists who viewed a video of the Arab Spring protests in 2011.

So this should definitely help the Department of Peacekeeping Operations with that whole catastrophic image problem thing…


Kate Cronin-Furman


  1. It’s actually all part of the plan – get Zimbabwean soldiers out of Zimbabwae so they can’t abuse and kill their own countrymen…

  2. Well, it could have been North Korea. Or US.

    I wonder, though, if we flip the situation around, whether the WTF factor is just as obvious to us. Meaning, what about where we humanitarians send ourselves? Could it not seem massively curious to people that we send an army of white US, UK, European aid workers to Zimbabwe? Or to Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *