Abstract
There is a widespread consensus that armed forces are not suited for law enforcement tasks. Most arguments against using troops in public security are based on the lack of appropriate training and the military's difficulty in practising restraint when using force. Brazil has nonetheless militarised its public security provision by increasingly deploying soldiers in 'Guaranteeing Law and Order' (GLO) operations - at times even justifying these missions with the military's experience in UN peacekeeping. Drawing on survey research, interviews and focus groups with troops as well as the observation of training exercises, this article asks: how has the participation in these missions affected troops' perceived skills in law enforcement? What kind of lessons are they transferring from UN peacekeeping to internal missions and vice-versa? What are their perspectives on having to apply coercion gradually? It will be argued that soldiers perceive to have gained a considerable amount of law enforcement skills during UN peacekeeping and GLO operations. However, there are clear limitations in critical situations. Soldiers and officers felt restricted by rules of engagement and considered the greater use of force allowed in UN peacekeeping as necessary for the mission's effectiveness. Not being allowed to act in a similar manner in GLO operations has led to high levels of frustration among soldiers and officers. In the trade-off between the rule of law and effective actions against criminals, troops tend to prefer the latter. This underlines the risk of deploying soldiers in law enforcement roles.