• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

What is Peacekeeping?

raymao

Jr. Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
110
In the Canada National Defense website: http://www.forces.gc.ca/dhh/engraph/faqs_e.asp?category=cpsm&FaqID=14#answer

FAQ # 9.

Question
What is the definition of the term "peacekeeping"?

Answer
In accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, peacekeeping is defined as: "The prevention, containment, moderation and termination of hostilities between or within states through an impartial third-party intervention organized and directed internationally for restoring and maintaining peace. This is conducted using military forces, police and civilians, and usually with the consent of the main belligerents."


This is from the United Nations Training and Evaluation web site: http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/field/pkeep.htm,

The standard definition of peacekeeping refers to a United Nations presence in the field (normally involving civilian and military personnel) that, with the consent of the conflicting parties, implements or monitors arrangements relating to the control of conflicts and their resolution, or ensures the safe delivery of humanitarian relief. It is a technique initiated by the United Nations as a means for maintaining international peace and security.

One useful way to approach the concept of peacekeeping is to divide it into three broad categories: 1) assist in maintenance of cease-fires, 2) implementation of comprehensive settlements, and 3) protection of humanitarian operations.

In the first category, peacekeepers not only monitor cease-fires but, by their very presence, enable clashing armies to pull back to a safe distance, where an atmosphere conducive to negotiations may be created. In short, the primary goal of this type of mission (comprised mainly of military personnel and a small number of civilian support personnel) is to allow time for political leaders and diplomats to negotiate and hopefully resolve underlying conflicts. The PKOs established on borders of conflict between Egypt and Israel or India and Pakistan are prime examples of operations set up as neutralizing forces.

The second broad type is also known as multi-dimensional peacekeeping, prevalent since the Security Council's establishment in 1989 of an operation in Namibia. With the end of the Cold War, members of the Council were able to agree on more ambitious and diversified operations. In providing a wider range of civilian experts to serve in such areas as human rights, local security, elections, and the re-integration of combatants to civilian life, the United Nations has been able to assist in the strengthening of national institutions at their very core. For example, missions in Cambodia, El Salvador, and Mozambique were able to bring about major political, social, and economic change for the populations within these nations.

Multi-dimensional operations are typically deployed for a limited time period (18 months to two years and, in some cases, even longer), at which point the peace-process is sufficiently consolidated for the peacekeepers to be withdrawn.

The third category of peacekeeping is an attempt by the international community to alleviate situations of massive human suffering. This type of operation is typically employed to protect the delivery of humanitarian relief in cases where armed violence has prevented efforts to assist a distressed population. This type of operation may be particularly difficult, especially in cases where the good-faith consent of the parties seems tenuous or the operation takes place in the midst of ongoing hostilities rather than in the context of a negotiated agreement.
 
Thanks, however I wonder if the 3rd definition is correct and this might be a leftover from the Liberal view of the world? Sounds more like Peacemakers.
 
The definition may still be on the DND website, but times are changing, fast.

Cheers.
 
Taking a conflict and preserving it in aspic so that a country can take advantage of the rush of UN/EU dollars into its economy.  Low level fighting flares up just often enough to persuade the UN/EU that it can't leave.  EVER.


 
Echo9 said:
Taking a conflict and preserving it in aspic so that a country can take advantage of the rush of UN/EU dollars into its economy.  Low level fighting flares up just often enough to persuade the UN/EU that it can't leave.  EVER.

This is Cyprus, described to a "T". Thank God we had the brains to pull out of  that waste after only thirty years. I suggest that, under a truly objective microscope, one would find that traditional UN peacekeeping has very rarely ever "decided" or "solved" anything. What (IMHO) actually decides things is not the presence of some lightweight, militarily hopeless force in blue hats and white vehicles, but traditional forces such as national interests, war weariness, and the intentions (and national interests) of the major players on the Security Council. IMHO what UN peacekeepng has normally done (with a few exception such as Cambodia, perhaps) is to provide a useful facade for other agendas.

Cheers
 
Cyprus, and Bosnia, and Kosovo, and Golan... you noticing a pattern yet?

The UN lives more off its reputation than its legacy.
 
Back
Top