Читать реферат по английскому: "Peacekeeping Or Western Ideological Enforcement Essay Research" Страница 1

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

Peacekeeping, Or Western Ideological Enforcement Essay, Research Paper

Peacekeeping, or Western Ideological Enforcement. Peacekeeping and its uses in the post cold war era. Dan Barham 100032310 April 6, 2000 POLS 4173 Dr Allen Chong. ??????????? Peacekeeping, an action

that is familiar to any student of international politics, or to anyone who

watches the news on a regular to semi-regular basis. Peacekeeping has long been

seen as one of the great Canadian contributions to the world. The rise of

intra-state conflict in the years following the cold war has lead to a renewed

interest in the possibilities of peacekeeping. The idea of only sending in a

force to keep the peace is no longer being looked at as the only option. Former

United Nations secretary-general, Kofi Annan,?

wrote a paper entitled ?Peace Operations and the United Nations ?

Preparing for the Next Century.? It was within this paper that he outlined a

need for the doctrine of peacekeeping to change to fit the new requirements

that the changing world required. Kofi Annan advocated a new approach, an

approach based on actions termed ?inducing consent? and ?coercive inducement?.

The possibilities for the spread of peace, and the rise of humanism and its

western definition? were expanding even

further. This approach and ideal is an admirable one, however it brings

peacekeeping closer to being an instrument of western influence, and further

from being simply an exercise to prevent war. It is this shift in the direction

of peacekeeping that is to be examined within the context of this paper. Is this

new approach to peacekeeping valid, or is it merely a precursor to the further

rise of western imperialism. The spread of humanism and the protection of the

weak and oppressed is an admirable goal, however the framework that is being

set up to allow for ?peace operations? within sovereign states leads us to a

dangerous set of possibilities later down the road. There is also the

possibility for this frame work to be abused in the future. The qualifications

for what necessitates an intervention are very important and must be weighed

carefully in order to avoid setting dangerous precedents. What happens when the

principals of western democracy and humanism to a totalitarian regime such as

China? You end up with a whole lot of reasons that call for ?peace making? or

?humanitarian intervention?. It is for these reasons that we must examine the

ground work that is being laid today, to make sure that the future structure

and actions that may come out of framework are possibilities that one would

even want to consider. Is peacekeeping becoming an excuse for something else? ??????????? Peacekeeping and UN

intervention was for the most part limited during the cold war. Division in the

security council prevented many actions from taking place. With the fall of the

USSR and the new partnership between Russia and its former opponents in the

west, there has been more opportunity for the UN and the Security Council to

intervene in the face of human suffering. ?Peacekeeping was pioneered and

developed by the UN as one of the means for maintaining international peace and

security. Most UN peacekeepers, often referred to as "blue helmets",

have been soldiers, volunteered by their Governments to apply military

discipline and training to the task of restoring and maintaining the peace.?[1]

Peacekeeping has been long seen as a humanitarian intervention to prevent great

human tragedy. Peacekeeping has however failed in the past to prevent a large

number of? crisis?s and stop a variety

of genocide acts. ?Too often the international community fails to do what is

needed. It failed to prevent the genocide in Rwanda. For too long it reacted

with weakness and hesitation to the horror of ?ethnic cleansing? in the former

Yugoslavia. In East Timor, it acted too late to save many hundreds of lives and

thousands of homes from wanton destruction?[2] ??????????? This inability for the

UN and its peacekeeping operations to intervene effectively has called into

question the very validity of peacekeeping operations. The example of the

humanitarian crisis in Sudan, and the ongoing simmering conflict in Cyprus. ?In

itself peacekeeping resolves very little. It is the ultimate non-solution.

Instead of launching a crusade, we attempt to arrange a cease-fire. Instead of

choosing one side over another and then battling it out to the bitter end, we

stall for time. We set up separate solitudes: isolated domains with a minimum

of interaction. Sound familiar? It is the blueprint of Canada, projected

outwards onto the world.?[3]

Peacekeeping has been seen as a non solution to the problems of regional

conflict, nothing is ever resolved when all that happens it the two sides are

sent to their corners and told that they are not to get on each others nerves.

The divisions simply simmer until the referee is not watching as closely and

one side can lash out without getting into too much trouble. ?The UN mission in

Cypress is a touchstone of the Canadian way, just as surely as Vietnam remains

an indictment of the American way. On cost more then a million lives and

inspired Apocalypse Now. The other

resulted in a constant vigil. Waiting, watching, holding our breath, standing

on guard. Heroic inaction.?[4]

The alternative, however, is not an acceptable option either.

Похожие работы