UN peacekeeping and reforms
By being reduced to ‘bystander’ status in the ongoing and serious conflicts in the world, the United Nations is frittering away the dividends of its ‘enforceable peacekeeping’
विश्व में चल रहे और गंभीर संघर्षों में 'मूकदर्शक' की स्थिति में सिमट कर रह जाने से, संयुक्त राष्ट्र अपनी 'लागू करने योग्य शांति स्थापना' के लाभों को बर्बाद कर रहा है।
United Nations through Chapter VI of its Charter
is committed to the peaceful settlement of disputes,
Chapter VII
Charter prescribes the use of armed force with the authorisation of the Security Council in cases of aggression and breaches of peace threatening international security.
Chapter VII further exhorts / says for member-states to make available such military or police forces as may be required to establish peace.
In fact Chapter VIII goes further and prescribes robust ‘regional arrangement’ in enforcing peace upon authorisation by the Security Council.
Hits and misses
UN ki force men क्या क्या शामिल किया गया है इसमें ?
strongly worded Charter and over 1,00,000 peacekeepers on the ground — to eliminate wars and exploitation from the world.
कहाँ कहाँ पर सफलता प्राप्त हुई है ?
UN political diplomacy and peace operations have established peace in many theatres in seven decades of peacekeeping such as in
- Cambodia,
- Mozambique,
- Sierra Leone,
- Angola,
- Timor Leste,
- Liberia and
- Kosovo, to name a few notably successful UN engagements.
कुछ एरिया जहाँ पर यूनाइटेड नेशन सफल नहीं हो पाया
UN unable to protect non-combatants
Yet, there have been glaring instances, such as in Rwanda (1994) and Bosnia (1995) where the UN was accused of being a bystander, unwilling or unable to protect non-combatants and vulnerable sections, especially women and children.
protection of civilians
That in subsequent missions, notably Sierra Leone (UNSMIL), Timor Leste (UNMIT), Darfur (UNAMID), South Sudan ((UNMISS) and the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO),
the UN brought the protection of civilians centrestage.
war in Europe and West Asia और यूनाइटेड नेशन की भूमिका
over the last three years, the UN has frittered away the dividends of its ‘enforceable peacekeeping’ between 2006 and 2020.
It has been reduced to a ‘Bystander’ status again in the ongoing conflict in West Asia and the war in Ukraine.
अपराधियों को सामने लाने और रक्षा के लिए निर्णायक कार्रवाई करने में विफल
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas-led massacre of non-combatants in Israel, followed by an even larger offensive of Israel on hapless civilians in Gaza, the UN response in both theatres has failed to call out the perpetrator in no uncertain terms and take decisive action in protecting civilian lives.
यूनाइटेड नेशंस कितना सक्षम है ?
This has happened despite it having a 1,00,000-strong UN military and police forces at its disposal, as battle ready infantry battalions and as ‘standing capacity” at its logistics hub in Brindisi, Italy.
आधे से अधिक को यूक्रेन, गाजा और पश्चिमी तट पर तैनात कर दें तो ?
यद्यपि 1,00,000 संयुक्त राष्ट्र वर्दीधारी बल अफ्रीका और अन्य स्थानों पर अनेक मिशनों में तैनात हैं, फिर भी यदि उनमें से आधे से अधिक को यूक्रेन, गाजा और पश्चिमी तट पर युद्धरत बलों के बीच में पुनः तैनात कर दिया जाता,
तो वर्तमान मिशनों को कोई गंभीर क्षति नहीं होती, ठीक वैसे ही जैसे वे साइप्रस में तुर्कों और यूनानियों के बीच में हैं या तिमोर लेस्ते में इंडोनेशियाई बलों और तिमोर लेस्ते के स्वतंत्रता सेनानियों, फ्रेटलिन के बीच में तैनात हैं।
निर्णय लेकर कार्य करने का एक खोया अवसर
.
Commitment for members
To maintain force but also to enforce peace implies their consent to protect civilians regardless of the ‘theatre’.
In the case of Timor Lester
impartially and decisively, work like in Kosovo (UNMIK 1999-2008) and Timor Leste (UNTAET, UNMIT 1999-2008), with legitimacy to use reasonable force.
It needed just over 6,000 UN uniformed personnel (typically, two infantry brigades) in Kosovo and 3,000 UN police personnel (including the lightly-armed formed police units) and an infantry brigade from Australia, under operational command of UN Mission (UNMIT) in Timor Leste to restore peace and bring back the rule of law and an elected government.
A deployment of similar numbers in a similar-sized geographical area of Israel-Gaza-West Bank needed .
There is a need for UNSC reform
The veto power of the P5, the Permanent Security Council members
the main perpetrators of the genocide, and UN Assistance Mission in Rwanda (UNAMIR) was a bystander.
The case for reform of the Security Council
The second is to bell the veto cat.
Way Forward: Proposed Reforms for an Expanded Security Council
- Structure of the Expanded Council: In an expanded Council of P7, rather than each member having veto power,
- contentious issues such as the use of force in West Asia to stop an expansionist Israel or in Ukraine to thwart the expansionist designs of Russia
- which in the current scenario will be vetoed by the U.S. and Russia, respectively — should have a division of votes of a P7 to decide on UN intervention.
- Enabling UN Peace Operations:
- Once such a division of votes is in favour of peace operations to thwart hostilities, the deployment of UN standing troops or shifting troops between ‘missions’ should be enabled under Chapters VII and VIII of the UN Charter, with full executive powers to the UN military and police commanders on the ground.
Conclusion
Ultimately, if the UN cannot stand on its own feet and enforce peace despite having standing uniformed forces of the size of a sovereign nation, then UN-led peace operations must close and the plush halls of the UN be used only for exalted deliberations by another international non-governmental organisation or a think-tank.
Wiithout a decisive action, the UN organization's lofty ideals will remain unfulfilled, and it may ultimately become a platform for mere discussions rather than a force for peace.
Source the hindu
Comments
Post a Comment