J2T2W4 “In Spite Of International Efforts, World Peace Remians Unattainable.” How Far Do You Agree? Flashcards
How does Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) facilitate the peace process/ communication and cooperation between feuding parties?
ASEAN was formed in 1967 with a Charter that enshrined “reliance on peaceful settlement of disputes”, “renunciation of aggression and of the threat or use of force”, and “respect for the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity of all”.
Coming on the back of the 1963-1966 war between Indonesia and Malaysia in Borneo, which also saw the former bombing Singapore’s MacDonald House in 1965 as part of its Konfrotasi campaign, the turn to multilateralism in the form of ASEAN was remarkable.
Since then, it has largely managed to maintain stability and security in the region via the use of frameworks like the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation. While absence of evidence may not be the evidence of absence, such structures have arguably not been immaterial in keeping war at bay.
UN’s mission in Liberia
The UN’s mission to Liberia began in 2003 with a Comprehensive Peace Agreement that put an end to a civil war that had destabilized not just the country but the region. It implemented a Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation, and Reintegration programme involving 100,000 ex-combatants and 24,000 weapons from all sides, quelling the conflict once and for all.
It also installed an electrical grid, instated a local police force, and instituted free, democratic elections, thereby ensuring that the root causes of civil strife- which went unaddressed when loyalists and two main rebel groups were at one another’s neck- would no longer spark fight. By the time the UN ended its mandate in 2018, Africa had one less source of conflict.
What are the causes of international conflicts and tensions?
The many entities that make up the patchwork of the Earth’s geopolitical landscape are, by default, self interested, it is only to be expected that they clash over a range of issues.
- Some are historical, ideological, or socio-psychological in nature, with battle lines drawn up between people who see each other as blood enemies or bearers of unpaid debt, Given their antagonistic attitudes and mutually exclusive ways of seeing the world, there is no real hope for a peaceful; resolution between the two warring parties to spontaneously arise.
- Others are economic, material, or territorial in nature, with people staking competing claims on the same piece of the pie. Given that the pie being carved up is finite, and the pie-eating contest is never fair, there is no real hope, again, for a win-win outcome where both parties leave with what they wanted and lay down their arms forever.
Why international efforts (Eg UN, ASEAN) can de-escalate tensions and facilitate peace?
The missing element in these bilateral exchanges is a third party or de-escalate tensions and delineate a path towards lasting peace. As a neutral participants, they would be able to bring the two parties embedded in ideological conflicts together to engage in dialogue rather than dogmatic calling. They also would be able to broker a compromise acceptable to the two parties entrapped in material conflicts as their lack of a vested interest allows them to make fair, objective judgements.
Why international attempts to broker peace from a third-party point of view are not always effective at alleviating troubles on the ground?
International efforts, by definition, deploy outsiders to a context that implicate generations of natives and involve emotions of an intensity incomprehensible to the uninitiated.
International efforts are hemmed in b the dictates of international law, which shrinks the scope of what they can do as a guest on foreign shores. This is especially obvious when they fail to change the course of civil wars - which, despite being intrastate, are surely also an impediment to world peace with their destabilizing and dislocating effects. In particular, the UN charter codifies major principle of international relations, chief of which is the supreme sovereignty of member state, as spelt out by Article 2, which reads that countries are not authorized to intervene in matters within the domestic jurisdiction of any state even if done in the name of something as grandiose as world peace.
Darfur Peace Agreement
Darfur Peace Agreement - a term that refers to any of three separate agreements signed by the Sudanese government and various rebel groups, hinting that none of them have truly worked. The mediators, the African Union, insisted that the first deal be signed in 2006 despite only the government and half of the Sudan Liberation Army liking it, while the latter’s other half, along with another rebel group, the Justice and Equality Movement, disliked the power sharing agreement proposed.
The 2006 deal broke down, as did the versions signed in 2011 and 2020. Mass killings in 2022 brought the death toll to 300,000 proving that peace has not been achieved.
How international efforts failed to avoid Rwanda genocide?
Rwanda genocide, which involves a systematic campaign by the Hutus majority to decimate the Tutsi minority, liking about 8,000 individuals daily for 100 days. The UN is overwhelmingly agreed to have failed in its peacekeeping duties, since it held back from responding to the use of force with force os its own, causing areas it had itself labeled “safe” to become sites of slaughter.
How conflicting interests of individuals states impede international initiative and institutions from working effectively? (UNSC)
A prominent example of self-serving behavior can be seen in the UN Security Council, which comprises fifteen countries, of which only five are permanent members: China, France, Russia, the UK and the US. Their special status confers each member the power to block any resolutions formulated by the rest of the organization, even if they are aimed at peaceful ends, that are contrary to its vested interest. Since a single veto can stonewall progress, the politicking of these five world “leaders” have often paralyzed the UN into inaction.
The US has been recalcitrant in repeatedly thwarting UN resolutions pressuring Israel to defuse the violence in occupied territories like East Jerusalem and discontinue its persecution of the Palestinian people.
In the current Syrian civil war, China and Russia variably vetoed resolutions on access to humanitarian aid, military intervention, and the use of chemical weapons.
