International Security: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) by Christopher S. Browning Read Free Book Online Page A

also endorses the principle of non-intervention in other states’ affairs, and restricts the use of force to prerogatives of self-defence and instances directly authorized by the UNSC. This had two effects for the UN. First, the emphasis on state sovereignty and non-intervention created a tension with commitments also expressed in the Charter regarding rights of self-determination for colonized peoples, an issue which became more polarizing as newly independent former colonies gained UN membership. Second, the emphasis on state sovereignty and non-intervention also meant that, in general, the UN had little interest in civil wars or the gross violations of human rights perpetrated by oppressive regimes against their own populations. International security, therefore, was primarily reduced to a concern with inter-state conflict.
    It was only with the end of the Cold War that the UN began to play a more prominent role. No longer hamstrung by the conflict, and with prospects for agreement within the UNSC improved, the UN became increasingly active—with the P5’s use of their veto powers declining significantly. For example, whereas between 1948 and 1988 the UN established 15 peacekeeping operations, since then (until mid 2012) a further 52 have been deployed.Most notable was the UNSC’s authorization of the use of force in response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, with this significantly raising expectations that a new dawn for the UN was under way.
UN peace operations
    One of the primary mechanisms through which the UN contributes to international peace and security is through its engagement in various types of peace operations. In this respect the UN distinguishes between five types of activity:
conflict prevention
(which concerns attempts to stop disagreements turning violent),
peacemaking
(which concerns diplomatic actions designed to bring warring parties to a negotiated settlement),
peacekeeping
(in which military, law enforcement, and civilian personnel are inserted to help implement agreements reached by peacemakers),
peace enforcement
(which entails using coercive measures to enforce the will of the UNSC), and
peacebuilding
(which concerns the post-conflict situation and attempts to foster peace and reconciliation through the rebuilding of societies). Although much could be said about each of these areas of activity peacekeeping and peace enforcement can be used to highlight some of the challenges the UN faces in its peace operations and the types of debates they provoke.
    Peacekeeping is the activity the UN is most renowned for and is most visibly related to the deployment of blue helmeted UN soldiers to monitor and supervise agreements between hostile parties. These might relate to monitoring ceasefires and elections, supervising the disarmament and demobilization of forces, or establishing buffer zones between belligerents—as with the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) deployed to the Sinai Desert in 1956 to separate Egyptian and Israeli forces. Fundamentally, peacekeeping concerns creating a space within which confidence and trust between hostile parties might be built, thereby fostering a moreenduring peace. Peacekeeping is therefore premised on the assumption that the belligerents have reached an agreement and are genuine in their desire for peace. More specifically, peacekeepers are only permitted to use force in self-defence, with this explaining why UN peacekeepers have at times been helpless to protect civilians and prevent atrocities when one side has reneged on their commitments. The futility of the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMS), initially deployed in April 2012 to monitor the cessation of armed violence, is a case in point, with UN observers frequently prevented from reaching sites of conflict or intervening on the ground, and with their function reduced to collecting evidence documenting the latest massacre.
    Although such instances are often shocking, the reason for such inaction