UN Peacekeeping and Reform

Table of Contents

Context: By becoming just a ‘bystander’ in the major conflicts happening around the world, the United Nations is wasting the progress it made through its peacekeeping efforts.

Quote

“Thou shalt not be a victim, thou shalt not be a perpetrator, but, above all, thou shalt not be a bystander.” – Yehuda Bauer (a Holocaust historian)

UN Charter and Peacekeeping Framework

The United Nations operates under a framework established by its Charter, particularly Chapters VI and VII:

Chapter VI focuses on the peaceful settlement of disputes, encouraging diplomatic resolutions.
Chapter VII allows the Security Council to take coercive actions against threats to peace, including military interventions when necessary.
- This chapter empowers the Council to determine threats and authorise military action to restore international peace and security.

Historical Context of Peacekeeping

While the UN has successfully established peace in various regions such as Cambodia, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Angola, Timor Leste, Liberia, and Kosovo, it has faced significant failures.
Notable instances include:
- Rwanda (1994): The UN was criticized for its inaction during the genocide.
- Bosnia (1995): Similar accusations arose regarding its inability to protect vulnerable populations.
In response to these failures, subsequent missions have prioritised civilian protection, reflecting an evolution in UN peacekeeping strategies.

Recent Failures: Ukraine and West Asia

Currently, the UN is facing criticism for its failure to act decisively in the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and West Asia (Israel-Gaza).
Despite having a force of over 100,000 peacekeepers, the UN has failed to prevent large-scale civilian casualties.
The redeploying a portion of these forces to Ukraine, Gaza, and the West Bank, as it had done in previous missions (e.g., Cyprus, Timor Leste), could have mitigated the violence.

The Need for Security Council Reform

Expansion of Permanent Membership: To include India and South Africa, representing the Global South and Africa, respectively.
Revising Veto Power: In an expanded P7 Council, veto power should be replaced by a division of votes.
This would allow peace operations in contentious situations like Ukraine (where Russia might veto) or Gaza (where the U.S. might veto) to proceed if a majority favours intervention.