The UN Security Council voted on 30 September to transform the Kenyan-led police mission in Haiti into a new Gang Suppression Force (GSF), and agreed to provide it with UN-funded logistical support. The new force represents a major enlargement of international security assistance to Haiti, with 5,500 troops authorised to conduct robust military operations against gangs, both independently and alongside Haitian authorities. 

In creating the GSF, the Security Council acknowledged that the current Multinational Security Support mission is ill equipped to halt Haiti’s wave of violence. Approved by the UN two years ago, the mission had received only a fraction of the voluntary funding and personnel it needed to reach full strength, even as gangs have staked control over large parts of the country’s territory, including 90 per cent of the capital Port-au-Prince. Council members are banking on the GSF’s larger size and its military, rather than police, set-up for a decisive shift in the balance of force. They are hoping that a reliable stream of funding for its logistics will enable the GSF to expand beyond a quick reaction unit into one that can mount a counter-offensive and sustain a presence across all the areas now controlled by gangs.

The vote ended the Security Council’s nearly seven-month diplomatic limbo on Haiti. After slow-walking its response to the Secretary-General’s February 2025 recommendations on the MSS, the U.S., alongside its co-penholder on the file Panama, spent the past month heavily lobbying Council members and countries in the region to back its GSF proposal. As part of the plan, Washington created a Standing Partners Group (including Canada, Kenya, Guatemala, Jamaica, El Salvador and the Bahamas) to provide strategic direction and political oversight to the force, including through selecting its civilian and uniformed leadership.

Although the GSF proposal received support from Haitian authorities, the Organization of American States, Caribbean countries and the G7, it did not get unanimous backing from the Council, with China, Russia and Pakistan abstaining. These three voiced concern about authorising the use of force for a non-UN operation, the ambiguity of proposed accountability structures, as well as the lack of details around which countries are prepared to contribute troops and the funds needed to cover their stipends. They also took umbrage with the apparent contradiction between Washington’s push for UN-funded logistics support and its simultaneous reluctance to pay its dues to the organisation’s peacekeeping budget.

Now that the resolution has passed, the U.S. and its partners face an uphill battle to deliver on these commitments. Voluntary funding is urgently needed to ensure a smooth transition from the current mission to the GSF and avoid a potential security vacuum. Without clear rules of engagement, offensive operations in Port-au-Prince’s urban areas may exacerbate the likelihood of civilian casualties, particularly children trapped by the gangs. Foreign capitals may see the GSF as their best chance to help Haiti restore security. But until financial support, troop-contributing countries and detailed operational plans are in place, the new force runs the risk of repeating past mistakes.