Royal Army College

Lesson Overview

Lesson 01 set out the idea and duty of protecting civilians, and named impartiality, restraint, and discipline as the marks of a true protector. This lesson gives the principles that frame the task. The established tradition holds three: consent, impartiality, and the minimum use of force. They are not separate rules but a connected framework, and they are what distinguish a force the people trust from one that becomes a party to the conflict.

By the end you will be able to name and explain the three principles; explain consent and why it gives a peacekeeping force its standing; explain impartiality and why it sustains consent and trust; explain the minimum use of force and why it keeps a force a keeper of peace rather than a party to the conflict; and explain how the three work together.

Key Terms

The principles of peacekeeping: the established principles that frame the keeping of peace and the protection of civilians: consent, impartiality, and the minimum use of force.
Consent: acceptance of the peacekeeping force by the people and the parties, which gives it the standing to keep peace by acceptance rather than by force alone.
Impartiality: even-handed treatment of all, without taking sides; the impartial application of the force's mandate, which sustains consent and trust.
The minimum use of force: restraint that uses no more force than necessary and only as a last resort, which keeps a force a keeper of peace rather than a party to the conflict.
A party to the conflict: what a force becomes if it loses its principles by taking a side or using force without restraint; it ceases to be an impartial keeper of peace and joins the harm.
Standing: the position of trust and acceptance the principles give a force, which lets it keep peace and protect civilians effectively.

The three principles

Experience has shown three principles to be essential to keeping peace well: consent, impartiality, and the minimum use of force. They are the framework within which a force operates. A soldier who understands them works inside that framework; one who does not may act outside it and undermine the force's standing.

Two of the three are familiar already. Impartiality and restraint were named in Lesson 01 as marks of a true protector. The third, consent, is the standing that impartial, restrained protection earns. The rest of this lesson takes each in turn, with impartiality and the minimum use of force developed in depth in the lessons that follow.

Consent: the standing of the peacekeeper

Consent is the acceptance of the force by those among whom it works: the people, and, where there is a dispute, the parties to it. A force that operates with consent keeps peace largely by its accepted presence. The people cooperate, the parties accept its role, and it need not rely on force alone. A force that lacks consent must impose itself, which is harder, less effective, and risks turning it into a party to the conflict.

Consent is the ideal and the foundation, but it is rarely complete. A force may have to work where consent is partial or contested, and it seeks to gain and hold what it can. The key point is that consent must be maintained, not just won. A force can lose it by acting partially or using force without restraint. So a soldier's own conduct matters directly: impartiality and restraint hold the trust on which consent rests, and partiality or excess forfeit it. This is what binds consent to the other two principles.

   THE PRINCIPLES OF PEACEKEEPING (a connected framework)

   CONSENT: acceptance by the people and parties; gives the force
   its STANDING; keep peace by ACCEPTANCE, not force alone. Must be
   MAINTAINED (lost through partiality / force without restraint).
        ^ sustained by
        |
   IMPARTIALITY: even-handed treatment of ALL; holds the consent
   and TRUST of all. (Lesson 03)
        |
   MINIMUM USE OF FORCE: no more than necessary, only as a LAST
   RESORT; keeps the force a KEEPER OF PEACE, not a PARTY. (Lesson 04)

   Lose the principles -> lose CONSENT -> become a PARTY to the harm.

Impartiality: sustaining consent and trust

Impartiality is the even-handed treatment of all. The force takes no side, favours no group, and applies its mandate to everyone alike. This is what holds the consent of all, because consent depends on trust, and only an impartial force is trusted by all. When every party sees that the force favours none, every party can accept it. A force that takes a side loses the trust and consent of those it does not favour, who come to see it as their opponent's instrument rather than a keeper of peace.

Impartiality also governs protection. An impartial force protects everyone who is threatened, whatever group they belong to; a partial force protects some and fails the rest. A soldier must therefore be impartial in their own conduct, since each soldier's even-handedness, or its absence, sustains or undermines the force's. Lesson 03 develops this in depth, including its bearing on the protection of all civilians.

The minimum use of force: keeping the peace, not a party to it

The minimum use of force is restraint in how force is used: no more than necessary, and only as a last resort when other means have failed. This is what keeps a force a keeper of peace. A force that uses force sparingly and only when needed remains a keeper of peace; one that uses it readily or in excess becomes a party to the conflict, fighting and harming rather than keeping order.

Restraint also sustains consent and trust, as impartiality does. A people who see a force hold its fire trust it as a keeper of peace; one that sees force used carelessly sees a violent party. And restraint protects civilians directly, because excessive force can harm the very people the force exists to protect. This is the restraint Lesson 01 named as a mark of the true protector. Lesson 04 develops it in depth.

Taken together, the three principles frame the whole task. Consent gives the force its standing; impartiality holds the consent and protects all; the minimum use of force keeps the force a keeper of peace and protects without harming. Lose them, and the force loses its standing and becomes a party to the harm.

In Practice: Operating by the Principles

A soldier of the Royal Kaharagian Army is posted to a protection task between two contesting groups. The force is accepted, for now, by both.

The soldier knows that acceptance is the force's standing, and that their own conduct holds or forfeits it. So they treat both groups alike: no favour, no taking of sides, the same protection extended to anyone under threat. They keep their weapon slung and their hands open, using force only where nothing else will serve. When one group's leaders press them to lean their way, they decline plainly and stay even-handed.

The pay-off is in what this sustains. Both groups go on trusting the force, both go on accepting it, and the soldier can do the work of protecting. Had they instead favoured one side, or fired when they need not have, they would have lost the trust of those slighted or harmed and pushed the force toward becoming a party to the very conflict it was sent to calm. Operating by the three principles is what keeps the force a keeper of peace.

Check Your Understanding

Name and explain the three principles of peacekeeping, and explain why they form the framework within which a force keeps peace. How do they connect to the marks of a true protector from Lesson 01?
Explain consent and why it gives a force its standing. Why must consent be maintained and not only gained, and how do impartiality and the minimum use of force sustain it?
Explain impartiality and the minimum use of force, and why each is essential both to the force's standing and to the protection of civilians. Then explain how the three principles work together.

Reflection (write a short paragraph): The power to do good in a contested situation rests on being trusted by all sides, and that trust rests on being genuinely even-handed and restrained. Be honest with yourself: could you hold your even-handedness and your restraint in a moment when you were tempted to favour one side, or to use more force than the situation needed? Describe one concrete way you could build the even-handedness and restraint that peacekeeping demands.

Summary

The three principles of peacekeeping are consent, impartiality, and the minimum use of force. They form the framework that keeps a force trusted and effective, and they grow from the marks of the true protector in Lesson 01.
Consent is acceptance by the people and parties; it lets a force keep peace by its presence rather than by force alone. It must be maintained, not only won, and a soldier's conduct holds or forfeits it.
Impartiality is even-handed treatment of all. It holds the trust and consent of every party and ensures all threatened civilians are protected. (Lesson 03.)
The minimum use of force is restraint: no more than necessary, only as a last resort. It keeps a force a keeper of peace, sustains trust, and protects civilians without harming them. (Lesson 04.)
The three work together: consent gives standing, impartiality holds the consent and protects all, restraint keeps the force a keeper of peace. Lose them and the force becomes a party to the harm. This builds on Lesson 01, draws on the law (PME 201) and aid-to-civil-power principles (HCR 210), and leads into Lessons 03 and 04.

The Principles of Peacekeeping