Owen Bowcott

Alarm about the involvement of U.N. peacekeepers in sex trafficking first arose during the 1990s when investigators found soldiers were customers in brothels run in Bosnia and Kosovo that relied on women sold into forced prostitution. One recent estimate suggested up to 2,000 women have been coerced into sex slavery in Kosovo.

Thursday’s report, by Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein, was commissioned to reform the way in which troops behave on U.N. missions. It was also aimed at devising a new investigative framework to detect and deter soldiers exploiting young victims, who are often impoverished refugees.

The U.N. is coordinating 17 mandated peacekeeping operations around the globe, involving a deployment of 75,000 personnel from scores of contributing nations.

“Despite the distinguished role that United Nations peacekeeping personnel have played over the last half-century,” the study notes, “there regrettably will always be those who violate codes of conduct and dishonor the many who have given their lives in the cause of peace. Sexual exploitation and abuse by military, civilian police and civilian peacekeeping personnel [are] not a new phenomenon.”

But the study, released at the U.N.’s headquarters in New York, adds: “The reality of prostitution and other sexual exploitation in a peacekeeping context is profoundly disturbing because the United Nations has been mandated to enter into a broken society to help it, not to breach the trust placed in it by the local population.” There have even been reports of pedophilia committed by peacekeepers.

Titled “A Comprehensive Strategy to Eliminate Future Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations,” the document insists that U.N. interventions operate on the principle that they will not “in any way increase the suffering of vulnerable sectors of [a] population.”

In the DRC, the report says, “sexual exploitation and abuse mostly involves the exchange of sex for money (on average $1-$3 per encounter), for food (for immediate consumption or to barter later) or for jobs.”

Sexual exploitation by peacekeepers may threaten the security of missions, the study suggests, exposing them “to blackmail and violent retaliation.” It also speeds the transmission of HIV/AIDS.

“Victims frequently suffer from psychological trauma as a result of their experiences. Victims and abandoned peacekeeper babies may face stigmatization by their families and communities, which deprive them of all support.”

One possible precaution, Prince Zeid contemplates, is to ban all sexual relations between local populations and members of resident U.N. military missions in high-risk areas. This would “protect the reputation and credibility of the mission” and safeguard “a local population highly vulnerable to abuse.” Another solution might be to encourage better recreational facilities for soldiers off duty. “Sites could [contain] sports areas, free internet facilities and subsidized telephone lines to facilitate contact with family and friends.”

An increase in the percentage of female peacekeeping personnel would help, the report observes. “The presence of more women in a mission, especially at senior levels, will help to promote an environment that discourages sexual exploitation and abuse.”

But the report’s more radical recommendations are contained in proposals to overhaul the investigation of allegations of rape and abuse. Courts-martial, it says, should be set up within mission areas for “serious offenses” to ensure immediate access to witnesses and evidence. They would demonstrate that there was “no impunity for acts of sexual exploitation and abuse by members of military contingents.” At present many of the accused return to their home countries, where prosecutions are rarely pursued. There have been exceptions. In the DRC, France recently jailed one U.N. civilian employee for rape and making pornographic films. South Africa and Morocco have also taken action against others.

Soldiers found guilty should have their pay docked and be made financially accountable, the report says. It adds that there should be “DNA and other tests to establish paternity” and that fathers should be required to provide child support.

In Britain, the Disasters Emergency Committee is due to announce Thursday that it will close its most successful appeal ever on Feb. 26, although it says that donations are still rolling in from sponsored runs and supermarket collections. It has collected more than 300 million pounds, and an additional 50 million pounds has been raised independently by other British charities.

Initial estimates place the bill for Indonesia at up to $5 billion and for Sri Lanka at $3.5 billion. Including India, the Maldives and Thailand, the total reconstruction costs are expected to be between $9.8 billion and $12.5 billion.

There is confusion, consequently, whether the extraordinary scale of the world’s generosity will be sufficient to deal with the unprecedented magnitude of the destruction inflicted by the disaster. The massive sums involved and the complexity of the operation have also raised fears that money could be siphoned off by corruption and that rival aid agencies might inadvertently duplicate aid projects.

The fluctuation in expectations is illustrated by the fact that British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on Jan. 3 that it was “almost certain” the government would match the donations made by the public. That plan now appears to have been quietly shelved. So far, the U.K. government has announced that it will give 75 million pounds directly, plus an additional 10 million pounds through the E.U. It has also promised 50 million pounds over the next decade in debt relief to affected nations.

The U.N., embarrassed by the shortcomings of its oil-for-food program in Iraq, is determined that the tsunami relief program should set new standards in transparency and accountability. Hafiz Pasha, the U.N. assistant secretary general in charge of the global tsunami task force, told the Guardian this week that U.N. agencies were still $270 million short of the funds requested in the first appeal for the recovery stage of the program. “Of that, $180 million has been promised but has not yet materialized,” Pasha, a former Pakistani finance minister, explained. “The remainder is not yet committed.”

In London on his way to visit the affected countries, Pasha hopes to persuade the Department for International Development and aid agencies to donate money raised but not yet allocated to specific projects. The priority now, he says, is repairing the basic infrastructure of roads, hospitals and schools. The difficult question, which has not yet been faced, is deciding how much should be rebuilt of communities that have been virtually eradicated. “In parts of Aceh [in Indonesia], it’s like ground zero. People will not necessarily go back to neighborhoods they lived in,” he said. “There are demographic issues which could lead to [different] resettlement patterns. Both Sri Lanka and Indonesia want to resettle people a significant way back from the sea.”

One recurrent criticism of aid work has been that cash is spent on foreign consultants’ fees. “We have had to take on 300 extra staff in Indonesia, the Maldives and Sri Lanka, but only 60 are expatriates,” Pasha said. “But our aim is that the cost of delivering the program should be not more than 5 percent of overall costs.

“We are worried about corruption. One of the things we have done is to strengthen our procurement processes in Bangkok to ensure that [our operation] is competitive and transparent. We are setting up accountancy systems with firms such as PriceWaterhouse, DeLoitte and Touche, and Accenture. A lot of it is pro bono work. We want to ensure the money really gets to the target.”

The other financial fear has been that the outpouring of generosity will divert funds from less dramatic disasters. Earlier this week the executive director of the U.N. World Food Program, James Morris, said: “We [must] ensure that the ‘tsunami effect’ does not ripple across Africa, drawing funds away from humanitarian operations there and adding Sudanese, Angolan and Liberian victims to its toll.”

Displayed on a notional scale of one to 10, rain-washed Ireland emerges with a gleaming top score of 8.33, well ahead of second-place Switzerland, which manages 8.07. The U.K. languishes in 29th place on 6.92, narrowly in front of South Korea (6.88). Zimbabwe, racked by political insecurity and hunger, is rated the gloomiest, picking up only 3.89 points. The figures may be reminiscent of a global version of the Eurovision Song Contest, but the intention behind the study — to find the best country to live in during 2005 — is serious as well as competitive.

“Although rising incomes and expanded individual choices are highly valued,” the report says, “some of the factors associated with modernization — such as the breakdown of traditional institutions and the erosion of family values — in part offset its positive impact. “Ireland wins because it successfully combines the most desirable elements of the new (the fourth highest gross domestic product per head in the world in 2005, low unemployment, political liberties) with the preservation of certain cozy elements of the old, such as stable family and community life.”

Ireland’s lifestyle victory represents rapid promotion for a country that until the 1990s suffered from large-scale emigration of citizens in search of work abroad. Membership in the European Union has, however, transformed its prospects. Ireland’s GDP per person — a standard, comparative economic measure — overtook the U.K.’s several years ago: Ireland’s is now $36,790, compared with $31,150 in the U.K. The U.K.’s reputation in Europe also takes a beating. The U.K. ranked the lowest out of the 15 members of the pre-enlargement E.U., chiefly due to the high rates of social and family breakdown recorded in official statistics.

Britain’s other large European partners, such as France and Germany, occupying 25th and 26th positions respectively, fared little better. But smaller states, including Sweden, Italy, Denmark and Spain, all appeared in the top 10. The U.S., which has the second-highest GDP after diminutive Luxembourg, slipped to 13th place in the survey. Other big economies did even worse. China was in the lower half of the league at 60th, while Russia, where GDP is only $9,810, scraped in toward the bottom at 105th.

“The results of the surveys have been attracting growing interest in recent years,” the magazine says. “It has long been accepted that material well-being alone does not adequately measure quality of life. Money matters, of course, but surveys suggest that over the decades big increases in income have translated into only a modest rise in satisfaction.”

The Economist’s complex equations used to produce the table gave most weight to matters of health, well-being, political stability and security. Less importance was attached to climate, job security, political freedom and gender equality. The Economist’s survey, published as “The World in 2005,” is in its 17th year.

Other organizations have tried to draw up comparative tables based simply on more subjective surveys about happiness. The results do not reflect the Economist’s priorities. The New Scientist magazine last year published a survey that ranked Nigeria as having the highest percentage of people who said they were happy, followed by Mexico and Venezuela. The citizens of Russia, Armenia and Romania were the most miserable.