Читать реферат по английскому: "Peacekeeping Or Western Ideological Enforcement Essay Research" Страница 2

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

much like democracy itself, is the worst possible system ? except for all the

others.? [5] It is due to the greater number of human

tragedies in the years since the cold war, and the sentiment that the current

form of peacekeeping is not enough, that there has been a greater desire for

the concept of peacekeeping to be reworked. Reworked from simple intervention

once a conflict is already in the advanced and bloody stages, to a form of

peacekeeping that is more preventative and has more power to intervene on

behalf of the victims of human rights violations. ??????????? United

Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan has of late been leading a drive towards a

new direction for peacekeeping, and the intervention of the international

community in the name of humanitarianism.?

Annan has termed it ?the United Nations humanitarian imperative.?[6]

Annan feels that the basic problem with peacekeeping as it stands today is that

has had trouble identifying areas where action is needed the most, that too

often states will put their own political interests in front of consistent

humanitarian action and the consistent enforcement of the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights.[7] The new

vision for peacekeeping is one where the ideals of human security, the

prevention of genocide, and the protection of civilians in the advent of an

?internal conflict?.? The new vision is

based on a ?duty to interfere? (le devoir d?ingerence) a phrase that was coined

by Bernard Kouchner, who was at the time, the head of the charity ?Medecins du

Monde.? His idea was that it was the duty of?

non-governmental organisations to cross national boundaries in order to

administer aid to victims, even without the support of the local government.

This concept was recognised and endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly

with the passing of two resolutions, one in 1988, and another in 1991. Each of

these resolutions uphold the right of people in desperate circumstances to

receive help, and the right of international organisations to provide it, even

without the permission of the local government.[8] Annan wishes to extend this further to include

peacekeeping operations. He sites the crime in French law that is called

?Failure to assist a person in danger?[9]

this coupled with the ?duty to interfere? is a justification for making

peacekeeping more preventative and moving with more force even when state

sovereignty may be violated.? The new

direction that peacekeeping is moving

under Annan?s direction is based on four new principals and a call for more

consistency. His first principal is the need for ?intervention? or ?peace

intervention? to be defined as broadly as possible, ?to include actions along a

wide continuum from the most pacific to the most coercive.?[10]

Armed intervention is the result of a failure by the international community to

prevent the outbreak of conflict within a region due to a lack of preventative

measures on the international communities behalf. It is necessary in Annan?s

estimation that an effort must be made to increase the preventative abilities

of the United Nations, to increase the capacity for early warning, preventative

diplomacy, preventive deployment and preventive disarmament. [11]

The second principal of the new peacekeeping is that the sovereignty of a state

is not enough to prevent effective action in human rights or a humanitarian

crisis. ?State frontiers should no longer be seen as a

watertight protection for war criminals or mass murderers. The fact that a

conflict is ?internal? does not give the parties any right to disregard the

most basic rules of human conduct. Besides, most ?internal? conflicts do not

stay internal for very long. They soon ?spill over? into neighbouring

countries.? [12] ?If States bent on criminal behaviour know that

frontiers are not the absolute defence; if they know that the Security Council

will take action to halt crimes against humanity, then they will not embark on

such a course of action in expectation of sovereign impunity.? [13]The third principal is that, in a situation

where it becomes necessary for the UN to intervene with force, it must be

ensured that the Security Council is able to act swiftly and effectively in

order to prevent a human disaster. The problem with the Security Council in the

past has been a lack of unity and inaction, in the face of such things as

genocide, due to Council division. Annan feels that Council States, and the

Member States of the United Nations should be able to find a common ground in

the principals of the UN Charter, and in the defence of the common humanity of

all peoples. Lastly the new formula for peacekeeping requires a continued and

strong commitment to keeping the peace. The commitment to peace must be as

strong as the commitment to war was.[14]

This is a caution against the ?conflict fatigue? that many experience when a

conflict goes on for too long. You see it on the news everyday, and eventually

you stop caring, it is this fatigue that ends aid, and allows the hostilities

to either go on, or start again. In order to fulfil the third principal of the

new peace keeping there is a movement amongst member governments to create

?rapid-reaction? peace forces. Peace Strike forces if you will. Able to quickly

and effectively ?intervene in crisis

Похожие работы