Dr. Nordquist's study and Newport Papers 13, What Color Helmet?,
reviews past peacekeeping operations and the aspects of the Charter
of the United Nations that govern the use of force. He proposes
that, given the end of the Cold War, distinctions in the UN Charter
framework between traditional peacekeeping and enforcement actions
can and ought to be reflected in future Security Council
peacekeeping mandates. He also offers realistic peace-enforcement
scenarios illustrating how updated mandates might operate. This
overview of the Charter and the challenges of modern peace
operations provides a better understanding of the legal and
institutional nature of the Security Council, of why existing
peacekeeping mandates now lack consistency, and of the importance
of dealing with these issues. This study is divided into five
chapters. The first focuses on the legal framework for peacekeeping
and enforcement operations under the United Nations Charter and the
North Atlantic Treaty. The general approach here is an
article-by-article review of the pertinent texts, without delving
into nuances of meaning or legislative history. Chapter II is a
brief summary of the forty peacekeeping operations in which the
United Nations engaged from June 1948 through the end of 1995.
Again, to foster a reform-minded policy outlook, only a skeletal
description of the mandate for each UN peacekeeping operation is
given. Marshaling such an outline of peacekeeping operations is
instructive in that even the bare recitation of this fifty years of
practice reveals a remarkable range of experiences. It is easy to
discern why Security Council mandates on peacekeeping lack
consistency. Chapter III of this study contains an analysis of UN
peacekeeping practice and of key points that ought to be dealt with
in reformulating traditional peacekeeping and enforcement actions
under Security Council mandates. In Chapter IV, several scenarios
are presented to illustrate how properly mandated peacekeeping and
enforcement operations might work in the post-Cold War era. To
emphasize the critical distinctions between different use of force
mandates and the corresponding legal status of the individuals
involved, the illustrations refer to white, blue, and green helmet
participants. Chapter V of this study proposes a few suggestions to
improve Security Council mandates for "mixed" traditional
peacekeeping and enforcement actions. A threshold comment is needed
for clarification about the use of the term "peacekeeping" in this
study. When the term appears alone, it refers to the great variety
of activities that have been mandated and therefore formally
designated as "peacekeeping" operations. As will be explained,
peacekeeping is a generic label that, inter alia, obscures an
important legal distinction between traditional peacekeeping and
enforcement actions. From a legal perspective, it is important to
know what is meant by the term "peacekeeping." However, efforts to
use more precise words with better defined meanings may also pose
problems. For instance, the term "peace enforcement" is now heard
and often seen in the literature. While this is an understandable
effort to distinguish operations based on consent from those that
are not, the term is not taken from the Charter, is ill-defined in
actual practice, and is logically inconsistent as a phrase. The
approach preferred in this study is to use words taken from the
text of the Charter or with an agreed meaning in State practice.
However, bowing to overwhelming usage, an exception to this
preference for precise language is made in the case of the term
"peacekeeping." Accordingly, the term is used in this study
generically to cover the entire spectrum of activities ranging from
traditional peacekeeping to enforcement actions.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!