Abstract:
Peacekeeping and peace enforcement are two very different
approaches in dealing with settlement of disputes and conflicts. Both
have their pros and cons, especially as far as the involvement of the
United Nations is concerned.
This thesis aimed to analyze the consequences of peacekeeping and
peace enforcement involvement, militarily speaking, under the
auspices of the United Nations. It aimed to prove that the United
Nations should not resort to peace enforcement and should limit its
intervention to peacekeeping because it is politically, militarily, and
in terms of lack of resources, is unable to achieve the intended
results in peace enforcement. The material and moral cost is
therefore, high.
This thesis started with the historical background of peacekeeping,
followed by an extensive elaboration on the meaning, essence,
objectives and evolvement of peacekeeping. Two case studies of
UNIFIL and UNFICYP were introduced to match the realistic
objectives of a peacekeeping mission with the ‘expected’ fulfillment,
making both of them some of the longest running peacekeeping
missions.
The peace enforcement section, similarly, began with an elaboration
of the concept, followed by two case studies, UNPROFOR and
UNOSOM, both unsuccessful peace enforcement missions.
Now, with the increasing calls for a military intervention of the
United Nations, this thesis proved that the organization should
refrain from such involvement. It was created on the grounds of
peaceful settlement of disputes, non violence, and preservation of
human rights. Any military enforcement will put its credibility in jeopardy.
