L12 - UN and Peacekeeping Flashcards
exam update + intro talk
30 mcq BUT not 3 essay questions -> only 2, 3 to choose from
in stead of 500 words, only has to be 200-350 words
talk
now talk about Ukraine peace
UNEF
UN Emergency Force
In 1956, to facilitate the disengagement of British, French, and Israeli troops from Egypt following the Suez Crisis, a multilateral armed force dispatched to help keep the peace until a political settlement could be reached
- Lestor Pearson proposed idea multilateral armed force dispatched in the region to act as buffer to keep both sides apart from one another
- was controversial: may 1967 Egypt (possibly as move to attack Israel) called for withdrawal -> Israel attacked (6 day war)
Egypt requests UNEF withdrawal in May 1967
UN + UNSC
- Created in June 1945
- Original membership 51 states (now 193) = most of them were allied with the west, but more countries became independent and joined -> UNGA pro-western orientation disappeared by the 70s
- Primary mandate, as espoused in UN Charter, is maintaining international peace and security
- Security Council pre-eminent organ responsible for maintaining international order
Security Council
- 5 permanent members (P5) w/ veto rights
- Until 1965 six rotating members
- After 1965 ten rotating members
- For a resolution to pass, at least nine votes for and no P5 votes against
UN Charter Art 2(4)
= prohibition against the use of force
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”
problems: Prohibition against the use of force does not cover all situations
- Sovereign states can use force within their territory
- Some theorists believe a state may be able to use force outside its territory, e.g. force used for humanitarian purposes or to protect citizens of the intervening state who are living abroad
- However, the UN Charter does not acknowledge these situations as exceptions to the prohibition against the use of force
- right to protect not in the UN charter
UN Art 51
“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.”
= use of force for self-defence is fine
BUT:
- self-defense must be necessary and proportionate to the aggression
- when a state faces an imminent attack, it may have a right to act in anticipatory self-defense (attack them first)
- art 51 and other provisions of the UN don’t address this situation
- but customary int’l law recognizes the right of anticipatory self-defense when an armed attack is IMMANENT and INEVITABLE
- you can never really tell they will attack
UNSC powers
Chapter VI (Pacific Settlement of Disputes)
- Security Council authorized to call disputing parties to resolve their conflict through peaceful means such as fact-finding, good offices, negotiation, arbitration and judicial settlement
- mediate disputes, arbitrate, arrive judicial settlements, fact finding missions etc.
!!!!!! Chapter VII (Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression)
- Grants Council coercive authority – it can compel compliance with decisions binding on member states
- It may impose diplomatic and economic sanctions and authorize military force
- art. 42 is part of this
- take actions by air, sea or land forces
Chapter VIII (Regional Arrangements)
- dupe ch7 but give it to someone else to deal with
- Encourages regional organizations to engage in peaceful dispute settlement and requires Council’s authorization before taking coercive action
- Grants Council power to delegate enforcement to regional bodies
- sometimes occurs e.g. in Africa with the African Union
Peacekeeping originally called “Chapter VI and a half” operations
- !! Not explicitly mentioned in UN Charter
- art 42 (chapter 7): use of force =
- The Security Council … “may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations”
what are peace operations?
Range from small observation and monitoring missions to peacebuilding in conflict-afflicted societies
!!!!!!!!!!!!! Original role of peacekeepers was to serve as buffer forces and observers !!!!!!!!!!!
- nothing to do with trying to change conflict inflicted societies or carrying out electoral observation missions etc.
- keeping 2 sides apart with their consent
Usually small-scale under Chapter VI
Some exceptions occur under Chapter VII: e.g. use of force authorized in Korean War, 20k strong peacekeeping force in Congo/Katanga
- Congo early 1960s
UNTSO
= going back to the start = effectively the first UN peacekeeping mission
1948 to monitor the ceasefires after the first Arab-Israeli war
unarmed military observers
!are still there today: still monitor ceasefire agreements in Lebanon, Golan Heights, Sinai
UNC
United Nations Command
was established on July 24, 1950
Signifies the world’s first attempt at collective security under the United Nations system.
United Nations Security Council Resolutions 83 and 84 provided the international legal authority for member states to restore peace on the Korean Peninsula
Designated the United States as the leader of the unified command we know as UN Command.
Resolution 1973 (2011)
other UN authorized mission, this is an example
against Qadaffi’s Libya
acting under chapter 7: authorizes states take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack
- amounts to regime change mission, but was not what was the intent = Russia says the mission overstepped the boundaries
5 peacekeeping principles
- UN-mandated mission
- consent of parties
- impartiality
- voluntary troop contributions
- UN can’t compel states to contribute, it has to be voluntary
- most come from the global south: they get a lot of money for it - minimum use of force
- only use it in self-defense
cold war peacekeeping
various missions
Includes:
- UN Emergency Force (Sinai)
- UN Observation Group in Lebanon
- UN Operation in the Congo
- UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus
- UN India-Pakistan Observation Mission (in Kashmir)
- UN Interim Force in Lebanon
(just mentioned them)
(fairly small scale apart from the Congo)
post-cold war
- UN invokes Chapter VII authorizing military force (US-led coalition) to remove Iraqi troops from Kuwait
- !!! UNPROFOR in Bosnia is UN’s largest peacekeeping mission
- New missions in Afghanistan, Cambodia, Angola, Namibia, El Salvador and Nicaragua – then to Bosnia, Somalia, Rwanda, Kosovo, Haiti, Democratic Republic of Congo, etc.
*Soviet collapse + redrawal -> more UN activity (mostly observers, e.g. soviet withdrawal)
!!!! Shift from peacekeeping to peace enforcement !!! (by the end of the cold war)
- Second generation peacekeeping includes electoral assistance, human rights monitoring
- trying to response to sexual abuse etc.
peacekeeping evolution
UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali in 1992 called for the establishment of “peace-enforcement units” to deal with challenges that exceed peacekeeping, but such units have never been created
- key year
- need for UN to play more direct role to enforce peace in cases without necessarily consent of both parties
- idea that UN would have much more militarized to take on these missions, but never actually happened (resistance from member states that didn’t want to commit forces to the UN)
National and multinational forces, such as those of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), have sometimes been called upon instead to assist UN peacekeeping operations with enforcement
By 2010, with nearly 100,000 uniformed personnel in the field (up from 14,000 in 1988), the United Nations was second only to the United States in the number of deployed armed forces under its command
The number of peacekeeping operations undertaken by regional organizations doubled between 1995 and 2005. The African Union (AU), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the European Union (EU), NATO, and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) all launched major peacekeeping operations of their own in that period
- other actors also taking bigger active role in peacekeeping
peacemaking
all fit under rubric of peace operations
Measures to address conflicts in progress and usually involves diplomatic action to bring hostile parties to a negotiated settlement
Involves negotiation, mediation, and democratic decision-making processes
Unlike peacekeeping, peacemaking uses mutual dialogue to achieve fair agreement about how to solve the immediate problem, thereby removing the parties’ incentives to use violence
!!!no military force
peacekeeping
Refers to the deployment of national or, more commonly, multinational forces for the purpose of helping to control and resolve an actual or potential armed conflict between or within states
Most peacekeeping operations are undertaken with the authorization of, and are often led by, the United Nations (UN) but regional organizations may also conduct peacekeeping operations, and in some cases single states have undertaken such operations as well
Peacekeeping forces are normally deployed with the consent of the parties to a conflict and in support of a ceasefire
- not always, but normally
Peacekeeping forces are usually unarmed or only lightly armed and use the minimum of force necessary
- during cold war often unarmed, since end of the cold war have been armed, but low level
Involves efforts to stop or limit the harmful symptoms of escalated conflict—direct violence (such as abuse or attack) or potential violence—and to establish sufficient safety to enable efforts toward preventing further violence
!!! Does not right wrongs or address the conflicts causing the violence
peace enforcement
(going from peace keeping to peace enforcement)
Refers to the use of military assets to enforce a peace AGAINST THE WILL of the parties to a conflict when, for instance, a ceasefire has failed
Peace enforcement often exceeds the capacity of peacekeeping forces and is thus better executed by more heavily armed forces
- e.g. 1990s Bosnia: not sufficiently well-armed to deal with the army in that area -> NATO was called to conduct airstrikes = peace enforcement
peace building
trying to address key issues underputting the violence
- the hardest and least succesful part of peace operations
Measures targeted to reduce the risk of relapsing into conflict by strengthening national capacities for conflict management and to lay foundation for sustainable peace and development
Transformation of social relations - repairing the systemic factors that were causing and exacerbating harmful conflict
economic sanctions and international criminal prosecution
e.g. Iraq after end first Gulf War
peace operations not necessarily militarily
- In addition to military force, Security Council also uses non-military coercion
- Sanctions on Iraq, al-Aqaeda and Islamic State
- Criminal tribunals – esp. former Yugoslavia and Rwanda
peacekeeping origins
!!did not begin with the UN, but with the LoN in a random region (Leticia)
internationalizing bunch of local troops
so first peace keeping troops: Colombian
League of Nations brought in to resolve territorial dispute between Colombia and Peru, 1933-34
The League appointed three member nations (Guatemala, Ireland and Spain) as a ‘Commission for the Administration of the Territory of Leticia’
Each side’s military forces were withdrawn and an internationalized force of Colombian troops under the Commission’s supervision policed the disputed area
LoN peacekeeping forces
Territories of the Saar basin, formerly part of Germany, placed under the administration of the League of Nations for a period of 15 years
At the end of 15 years, a plebiscite was to be held to determine the final status of the Saar
An international police force, composed of soldiers from Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, and Sweden, was deployed to maintain order on the day of the plebiscite
!!nothing really serious, just to say it did not start with the UN!!
covenant LoN art 10 + art 16
talks about aggression
The Members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League.
!!! In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled.
(can only understand the UN by looking at the failure of the LoN)
- covenant had version of no use of force clause
ART 16 MORE IMPORTANT
- UN not the first to use sanctions to protect use
- also potential use of force, but did not commit to useing military force to counter an aggressor, could only recommend that miltiary action be taken and facilitate it (it was not guaranteed they would do it, could only recommend)
Should any Member of the League resort to war in disregard of its covenants under Articles 12, 13 or 15, it shall ipso facto be deemed to have committed an act of war against all other Members of the League, which hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all trade or financial relations, the prohibition of all intercourse between their nationals and the nationals of the covenant-breaking State, and the prevention of all financial, commercial or personal intercourse between the nationals of the covenant-breaking State and the nationals of any other State, whether a Member of the League or not.
It shall be the duty of the Council in such case to recommend to the several Governments concerned what effective military, naval or air force the Members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League.
!!!important point: there was the possibility of miltiary action, but also economic and.. actions
weaknesses LoN
Intended to prevent states from going to war, the final sanction was the threat of force
- intention not to use force
- how to make legitimate threat to use force if whole organization is to not go to war?
Ultimate authority rested on the mobilization of world opinion
- trying to make the war/aggression unpopular
Belief that the threat of economic sanctions, alone, would be sufficient to deter states from aggression
- Article 16 reflected the experience of WWI when the blockade weapon had been used to good effect
- belief that eco sanctions kind of worked during the first world war (which is dubious) -> use more
LoN
2 cases specifically led to its demise:
Manchuria 1931 + Ethiopia 1935 (not in the slides)
The League acted as an arbitrator in disputes and established commissions to investigate problems
Where aggression was found, sanctions could follow
Following Japanese 1931 seizure of Manchuria sanctions were not used
A Special Assembly voted that Japan should withdraw from Manchuria.
When the Japanese refused and left the League of Nations, the League responded by reprimanding Japan
The floodgates open: if they can get away with seizing territory, what does it mean for everyone else?
- Japan left (not really caring about commitments), nothing really happened
Abyssinia (Ethiopia) = no real serious action taken against Italy’s aggression
- Following 1935 Italian invasion, limited sanctions were imposed
- Not applied by all member nations and did not include some key products such as oil
- The League made no attempt to limit Italy’s ability to wage war, such as closing the Suez Canal to Italian shipping
- Sanctions were dropped following the Italian conquest of Abyssinia in 1936
- Leads to widespread belief that League of Nations unwilling or unable to use collective force to prevent conflicts
Is the UN efficient?
winning the war in war (Goldstein)
Controversial book describes the decline of war, the effectiveness of peacekeeping, and a causal connection between them
- tried to link rise UN and peacekeeping with decline of war thesis
- UN seen as central to decline of war + didn’t solve all problems, still a force of good
According to Goldstein, the UN:
- “lies at the heart of the war on war”
- Is the “central thread” in reducing levels of violence in conflict-ridden countries and in keeping the peace in many postwar societies
- “has many problems . . . but they should not distract us from the tremendous good that the UN has accomplished … in reducing war”
but in practice: no one really agrees with link long peace and UN peacekeeping:
There is no question that the UN played an important role in helping to shut down some deadly conflicts over the past six decades
BUT …
- UN deals with consequences of war, not onset of war
- Hard for peacekeeping to explain the long-term downward trend in war given its relatively recent invention
- While peacekeeping has been shown to be effective at preventing the resumption of specific wars, its effects on the overall level of war in the world are not straightforward
- Consent of parties means peacekeeping “works” when it is not needed and “fails” when it is needed most
- Prospective availability of peacekeeping to maintain peace once achieved probably allows some wars to end that would otherwise last longer
is peacekeeping counterproductive?
wars that end with a clear victory lead to a more stable peace than inconclusive wars
peacekeeping, by allowing wars to end sooner, but less decisively, may leave issues to fester that would otherwise be resolved, eventually leading to repeated fighting that would not otherwise occur
did the UN promote peace during the cold war?
UN did NOT have a significant effect on relations between the superpowers
UN was virtually powerless when it tried to push a policy that one of the superpowers opposed
It did serve as a convenient forum for seeking international legitimacy, third party mediation, and dealing with issues the superpowers were mainly indifferent to or had a common interest in resolving
they didn’t really care about many things
UN was useful as place to win the court of world opinion (e.g. Cuban Missile crisis: show that SU was lying about how many nukes it had)
the UN after the cold war
Some successes but also many failures …
- NATO did not initially have UN support in 1999 when it went to war with Serbia over Kosovo
- When the US could not get the UN’s permission to invade Iraq in March 2003, it simply ignored the UN
*But after Saddam Hussein overthrown, UN becomes involved in post-war reconstruction (UNSCR 1483)
*went without permission - UN unable to check Russian aggression against Ukraine in 2014/2022
Right to Protect
R2P: increasingly discourse 90s/00s to protect populations from their own nations
Calls for initiating wars against countries that commit serious crimes against their own civilian populations
Goes well beyond peacekeeping and can only be implemented under UN auspices
If the major powers get serious about this doctrine, there should surely be a significant increase in the number of wars fought in the future
However, R2P is not likely to gain much traction, simply because it will be difficult to get the Security Council to sanction R2P operations, as occurred with Chinese and Russian opposition to intervention in Syria
- in case of Syria nothing was actually done
key failures UN
Srebrenica
= failure UN to take action sooner (-> in other cases try to make sure it never happens again, e.g. in Libya humanitarian intervention to not have another Srebrenica)
- Town designated a safe area by UN and protected by Dutch peacekeepers
- Dutch forces were under-supplied, under-equipped and its superiors at the UN were unwilling to give it additional support
- July 1995, Dutch forces confronted by advancing Bosnia Serb army
- Massacre of 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys by Bosnian Serb forces
- Ethnic cleansing of 20k civilians
Worst instance of mass murder since WWII - In July 2014 a Dutch court found the Dutch government liable for deaths of more than 300 Bosnian Muslims
Rwanda
= many deaths
- UN Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) created in 1993 with mandate to oversee peace agreement ending civil war
- Following renewal of violence in April 1994, UN reduces its military presence
- With onset of genocide, UN Commander Dallaire requests reinforcements but is unsuccessful
- Uses limited forces to protect as many civilians as possible
- Reinforcements eventually arrive in June but only after 800,000 Tutsis murdered
-> idea need for organizations like NATO they can respond earlier
MINUSMA
= multidimensional integrated stabilization mission in Mali
(Dutch played prominent role)
launched in July 2013
authorized size of 11.200 military personnel and 1440
afterwards Wagner group was brought in
THING TO REMEMBER = existed/operated bc French army was also in Mali and was providing the heavy firing power
!!! MINUSMA and MONUSCO = 1/3 all deployed UN peacekeeping personnel
rise and fall UN operations
Until 2016 number of UN operations increases with 117k personnel deployed on 16 operations
after 2016 it begins to fall
- Operations in Liberia, Haiti and Darfur end (or are shifted to other organizations)
- Budget cuts
- Security Council gridlock
UN peacekeeping missions have steadily reduced in number and size
- Only several remaining (Central African Republic, South Sudan/Abyei region, Western Sahara)
June 2023: military junta in Mali request withdrawal of UN mission (MINUSMA)
- Deployed in Mali since 2013
Coincides with request to end French military mission and invitation to Wagner Group
Democratic Republic of Congo terminates UN mission (MONUSCO)
UN troops deployed in Congo for two decades
!!! MINUSMA and MONUSCO = 1/3 all deployed UN peacekeeping personnel
UN peacekeeping today
11 missions
(mainly in Africa and Middle East)
peacekeeping demographics
Early contributors mainly neutral countries (Ireland, Sweden, Yugoslavia, Austria), plus others such as Canada
Global South now provides most uniformed personnel
- Bangladesh (6447), Nepal, India, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Egypt
- top European country: Italy a couple of hundreds (really diff scale)
UNSCR 1325
female contributions to UN peacekeeping missions
- partly response to sexual violence Rwanda and former Yugoslavia
- idea to bring them in the mission + deal with issues relating to women and girls in post-conflict socieities
In 2000, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) formally acknowledged the changing nature of warfare, in which civilians are increasingly targeted, and women continue to be excluded from participation in peace processes.
The resolution specifically addresses how women and girls are disproportionally impacted by violent conflict and war and recognizes the critical role that women can and already do play in peacebuilding efforts.
UNSCR 1325 affirms that peace and security efforts are more sustainable when women are equal partners in the prevention of violent conflict, the delivery of relief and recovery efforts and in the forging of lasting peace.
- shift from all-male peacekeeping units to greater female participation, incl all female police units
- to counter sexual violence
- focus on protecting women in post-conflict societies
- by 2020, 1/3 peace operations personnel were women
UN peacekeepers and scandals + risks
various scandals: warcrimes (e.g. Bangladesh soldiers had done warcrimes in Bangladesh, then were sent on peacekeeping missions), raping, torture
- Bangladesh kept these people in the missions
peacekeeping is not risk free
- 1948-92: 918 peacekeeper fatalities
- 1993-201: 1832 peacekeepers fatalities
- some are accidents
- fire power to deter attacks
African-led peacekeeping
lot of missions previously from Un were taken over by AU or Ecowas
Increasing shift from UN to African-led operations
Reflects decreased UN legitimacy and preference for regional peacekeepers
Occur under auspices of African Union (Somalia), ECOWAS (Liberia), and ad hoc coalitions (Multinational Joint Task Force in the Lake Chad region)
Since 2000, 38 African-led peace support operations
Ten active operations as of 2023
- Mozambique, Ethiopia, Gambia, Mali, Chad etc.
NATO-led peacekeeping + EU peacekeeping + Russian peacekeeping
NATO = deployed to Bosnia (SFOR) and Kosovo (KFOR, since 1999)
- stabilization force
- later transferred to the EU
EUFOR = operation Althea
- replaces nato sfor in Bosnia (just put diff padges on)
Russian peacekeepers
- deployed to maintain Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire between Armenia and Azerbaijan
- peacekeeping in Ukraine?
odd cases - neutral nations supervisory commission
near end Korean conflict, bc UN was on one side and communist forces on the other side -> who can be an honest broker if UN is participant?
-> create neutral nations supervisor commission
(Switzerland, Sweden, Poland, Czecho-Slovakia)
odd missions - international commission of control and supervision
like Paris peace agreement 1973 Vietnam
= supervising peace treaty
ICCS = i can’t control shit
peacekeeping War in Ukraine
aka ceasefire enforcement
this week military chiefs meeting in London to talk about possibility international military force
-» not clear what we’re talking about: monitoring, deterring etc.
elements of ceasefire deal:
- Ceasefire agreement
- Agree on ceasefire line
- Creation of Joint Military Coordination Commission (e.g. to help exchange prisoners and solve disputes)
- Agreement on a buffer zone and limitation zones for heavy weapons
- International monitoring and verification mission (to include European troops?) -> but what does it actually do? + who will do it?
- Humanitarian demining
- Humanitarian corridors (for people who want to cross)
- Security guarantees (what happens when the other side breaks agreement: what support they will get)
- Build on ceasefire to achieve political settlement
preconditions for ceasefire
For Ukraine - legally binding security assurances? Ukraine looking for direct intervention of western forces, not aid
confidence building measures/de-escalation:
- No attacks on port infrastructure
- No attacks on civilian ships in the Black Sea
- No attacks on other critical infrastructure, e.g. energy installations
- No targeting of Ukrainian airports
ceasefire line:
- Line of Contact or basis for a demilitarized zone? (front line)
- Demilitarized zone implies a long-term de facto division of the country
- Line of Contact considered more of a transitional arrangement - Buffer zone or zone of separation
- Approximate 10-15 km wide would be absent of military forces, heavy and light weapons, as well as being a no-fly zone for UAVs – except those of international monitors
- Wider buffer zone (how wide depends on which weapons)
- Must be verifiable
- Separate agreement needed for maritime security
int’l monitoring and verification
- Requires a clear mandate and assumption of a ceasefire
- Length of ceasefire line probably 1200 km (5x length of Korean DMZ) – need to patrol 24/7
- Probably an international mission rather than a UN one
- Core tasks include monitor ceasefire and to verify withdrawal of troops and heavy weapons
- Large force interposing itself between Russian/Ukrainian forces unlikely (50k troops)
- Lighter force located on both sides of ceasefire line limited to monitoring and verification (15k troops)
- International force equipped with armored vehicles, helicopters, light aircraft, UAVs
- Led by Force Commander reporting to UN Security Council
- Composition of force agreed to by both sides? (UN Force – blue berets? Will Russia accept troops from NATO countries, incl. NATO minus America? Which countries are willing/able to send troops and viewed as impartial? Global South?)
- If only civilian force, will either side have confidence in it?
- Indefinite commitment
- far greater scale than what UN has done in the past
Military component
- Monitor implementation of ceasefire/report violations
- Verify withdrawal of heavy weapons
- Support de-mining
- Enable humanitarian corridors
civilian component
-Monitor/report on human rights violations
- Provide humanitarian assistance with a focus on marginalized and vulnerable groups including the elderly, women, your and children
- !!!!! Provide medical/psychological assistance to population (e.g. helping with PTSD)
security guarantee
- Ukraine will want guarantees it will receive military direct/indirect and other support if Russia resumes aggression
- what type of deterrent is sufficient? e.g. European troops stationed in Ukraine (tripwire force), European patrolled no fly zone? more weapons - higher quality - what will Russia demand? no NATO troops in Ukraine?
will it last?
