United Nations peacekeeping or peace enforcement. (c2012)

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.