United Nations PeacekeepingEssay Preview: United Nations PeacekeepingReport this essayThe Effectiveness of UN Peacekeeping“The United Nations is so radically defective that it is incapable of establishing world order; truth be told, not only has the UN failed [to achieve its peacekeeping objectives], but it was always bound Ð to fail” (Simioni 12). At first sight, it would seem that this is part of just one of the many current debates about the effectiveness of the UN as the main arbitrator of the international community. In fact, it represents one of the view points expressed in August 1947, soon after the failure of the first and only round of negotiations concerning the establishment of a transnational army under direct UN command (DEA 33). Since then, the controversy about the role of the United Nations in maintaining global security has remained an ever-current issue, with prominent political personalities contesting the reliability, and even the underlying principles of such an organization. In spite of the never-diminishing criticism, the UN remains a key player on the global arena, the only truly representative spokesperson for an increasingly complex assembly of peace-seeking nations. Moreover, ever since its establishment in 1945, the United Nations has achieved notable successes in promoting world peace, by delivering efficient peacekeeping and peacemaking operations, by diversifying its conflict-prevention measures, and by maintaining an equidistant and impartial position towards combatant parties. These standards have been considered essential in assessing the effectiveness of the UN throughout its existence. The neutral stance towards world issues was highly valued by the founders of the organization. Subsequently, former Secretary-General U Thant stated, “the basis of the UN is the pledge by sovereign states to co-operateÐ in [efficient] joint missions to alleviate conflicts worldwideÐ… in a responsible and [fair] manner” (qtd. in Schoenberg xi). In later years the trend to broaden peacekeeping initiatives represented Kofi Annans main strategy of further enhancing the organizations ability to cope with new geopolitical developments. Therefore, in evaluating UN successes it is essential to consider both quantitative and qualitative evidence supporting the three above-mentioned criteria.
From peacekeeping to peacemakingOver the years, the UN has moved from traditional, observer-based peacekeeping to more complex and efficient “peacemaking” operations. In the very beginning of its preamble, the UN Charter ratified by the first General Assembly in San Francisco clearly affirms:
We the peoples of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, Ð… [and] to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, Ð… have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims (Charter qtd. in DEA 1-5).
However resolute, the mere assertion of peace as the main goal of the organization was not enough. In the tense political situation created after WWII, with the Communist Bloc and the Capitalist West becoming increasingly abrupt in their bilateral international approaches, it was time for the newly established organization to get involved. As the relations between the United States and the Soviet Union soured, the UN became the key stability factor between the two major poles of power. In fact, “[k]eeping the Cold War (1950-1989) from turning hot can be considered the UNs single biggest job” (Morton 21). Since then the UN has been involved in numerous large-scale operations. Nevertheless, considering the four decades of rising tensions, with increasing amounts of “military machinery and weapons [being] stockpiled for a third world war, which many people believed was inevitable” (Chasmer et al. 280), controlling the outcome of the Cold War remains a great achievement, accomplished not by use of military force, but of diplomatic ingenuity.
In the early years of the United Nations, the Security Council had some successes in dealing with disputes in which the Cold War antagonists were not directly involved. “Peacekeeping began with the formation of small groups of observers to monitor compliance with UN resolutions” (DFAIT 11). The credibility acquired by the United Nations from these missions, as well as from the equilibrium maintained between the Warsaw Pact countries and the Western World, is indisputable: while only 50 members had initially founded the organization, current membership figures have already reached 189 member states (“un.org”). However, since the end of the Cold War Ð- in order to efficiently accomplish its primordial objective Ð- the UN has gotten involved in an increasing number of ethnic, religious and inter-
country tensions that have flared up in many regions of the world. Figure 1 , corroborated from data provided by the Department of Public Information of the UN, clearly shows the staggering increase in the number of peacekeeping missions undertaken by the Security Council. Actually, out of a total of 53 missions, only 13 were started during the first 40 years of United Nations existence; the remaining 40 missions have all been launched since 1988, within a time span of less than 15 years (50 Years 23). Consequently, the effectiveness of the UN in seeking world peace stands in its ability to motivate member states to provide well-trained troops and civilian personnel, who can then intervene in trouble-spots around the globe. To date, over 750,000 military and civilian personnel from 111 countries have taken part in peacekeeping missions, with 15 operations currently under way, involving 14,500 peacekeepers, as of June 15, 2001 (Facts, sec. 3) (see Figure 2).
Looking beyond the numbers, in recent years the UN abandoned traditional peacekeeping, which typically involves basic military tasks, such as monitoring ceasefires, separating hostile forces, and maintaining buffer zones. Instead, it has developed more complex peacemaking operations, “which involve simultaneous political, military and humanitarian activities, Ð… built on the experience gained by more conventional task forces” (50 Years 24). Such missions are far more efficient, because they address the problem with an in-depth approach, including, but not limited to, civilian police, human rights monitors, help for dislocated refugees, as well as basic infrastructure and logistic support. Considered a great success of modern UN peacemaking, the operations in the former Yugoslav Republic involved Ð- at their peak, in 1993 Ð- a total deployment of over 63,000 military and civilian intervention personnel. In spite of complex
, the overall effectiveness of any operation can only be gauged in the fact that it may be able to provide assistance. For example, humanitarian aid is provided by the Ministry of Transport, a highly advanced human rights NGO that is widely recognized for its impartiality in helping out refugees.
In 2004 the U.N., along with other countries, established the UN Humanitarian Assistance Program (HAP.) and initiated its first-ever international humanitarian assistance (IEGI) program. The IEGI will, in principle, help facilitate the implementation of international agreements that provide assistance to persons in need in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is done by using the IEGI to carry out its work in developing human, sustainable development, as well as providing aid to displaced persons in other countries and in the Middle East, who may have been displaced but are still living in their countries of origin.
The UNHAP can also be a means of providing aid to the following entities: (1) displaced persons in their own countries of origin; (2) people displaced through a conflict; (3) persons displaced through terrorist actions; and (4) displaced persons who have been in the country of origin since January 1, 2003. This enables a person to receive humanitarian assistance within the limits specified by the United Nations for that nation. For each entity, the UNHAP can assist. It will assist the following entities only: (a) displaced persons in their own country of origin; (b) refugees in their country of origin for their own cause; (c) displaced persons who are living outside of their own country and who are displaced through international human rights law; and (d) persons who are not able to receive humanitarian assistance because of lack of funds, due to other conditions. A UNHCR’s mission is to provide humanitarian assistance to those in need in the countries covered by the IEGI. UNHCR (Tier I) is a non-governmental organization that provides humanitarian aid for individuals, places of refuge and places of refuge of internally displaced persons or groups. It is composed of members from around the world, including those from the Arab world, the United States of America, countries such as South Korea, and the countries participating in the U.N. IEGI assistance program for Iraq and Palestine. The IEGI does not support all of the states outside Iraq and may be used for purposes outside Iraq. It does not provide any funding or funds to the United Nations or United States on humanitarian grounds. It does not participate internationally in international humanitarian assistance. UNHCR (Tier II) is a non-governmental organization that provides humanitarian aid for individuals, places of refuge and places of refuge of persons seeking to return home. It will be the subject of assistance in some instances and support only to those who have been identified and are recognized as a refugee under international law. UNHAP will be given the capacity to operate as a primary sponsor of international humanitarian assistance for this country. However, when other countries do not provide this capability to UNHCR, UNHCR will be considered for assistance. The IEGI has an initial mandate of providing support only of persons who, on the basis of a credible and credible record of risk assessment and decision making, have made one case within the next 48 hours or for whom they have no credible and credible record of risk assessment and decision making. It will be the subject of assistance only once, or only after the fact, in the form of a case evaluation.
The United Nations system of State of Palestine does not provide for the sharing of resources with non-State bodies. It does not allow the United Nations to provide relief and humanitarian assistance to the various Palestinian entities under this program. It is up to each entity to