Writing in Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. History, D.B. PUSHKINA examines the existing measures of the UN’s effectiveness, proposes a new scale of measurement of successes and failures of UN peacekeeping operations and examines six cases in Africa (UNTAG in Namibia, ONOMOZ in Mozambique, UNAMIR in Rwanda, UNOSOM in Somalia, MINURCA in the Central African Republic, ONUB in Burundi) across proposed measures.
The definition of success the author offers in the article – ‘Successes and Failures of United Nations Peace Operations’ – comprises limiting violent conflict, reducing human suffering, preventing conflict from spreading, and preventing war from recurring.
That definition, according to the author, does two important things: 1) it acknowledges the different nuances, voices, and forces – international and domestic, societal and institutional – affecting whether a mission may or may not be considered successful; 2) it insists that the human dimension remains the primary criterion for such considerations.
“A more nuanced consideration of ‘success’ and a close look at so many cases is relevant not only to conceptual debates about these issues but also to ‘real’ policy in the past, present, and future.”
The six UN peacekeeping missions in Africa originated after the end of the Cold war and have been completed at the time of writing. She finds that two out of those missions succeeded across most of the criteria, two failed and two fell into the gray area of partial success-partial failure.
“The most important observation that can be made from this classification is that in several cases the overall assessment does not overlap with mandate implementation,” the author states. For example, ONUB in Burundi, despite fulfilling most of the mandate’s objectives and classified by the UN as one of its most successful missions is placed in the partial success/failure group, mostly due to the current instability in Burundi, hence, UN’s weaker contribution in progress towards positive peace.
Concerning various criteria of success, UN peacekeeping has been particularly unsuccessful in preventing genocide and/or civilian massacres. Varying success was demonstrated in limiting violence, preventing violent deaths and refugee and IDP resettlement/preventing outflows. UN missions have been fairly successful in preventing conflicts from spreading and creating regional instability.
Regarding conflict resolution measures, UN missions performed better in preventing reoccurrence of war within two years after departure, but UN peacekeeping has been less successful at contributing to progress towards positive peace.
The difference between evaluation of the missions based solely on mandate implementation versus on their contribution to limiting violence, reducing human suffering, preventing conflict spread, preventing the recurrence of war and contributing to progress toward positive peace leads to a deeper understanding of whether the UN Security Council is making the right decisions for particular situations and whether UN peace operations are indeed utilizing all of their potential for bringing stability to the world.
Successful missions offer support for an optimistic outlook. Partial successes, especially those of missions deployed amid ongoing wars, reinforce this optimism but offer a word of caution to avoid too demanding expectations of UN troops. “Finally, failed missions should never be forgotten or under-analyzed in order not only to avoid mistakes in the future but also not to place all blame on peacekeepers as opposed to the decision-making bodies.”
Pushkina D. B. Successes and Failures of United Nations Peace Operations. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. History, 2020, vol. 65, Iss. 1, рр. 261–277.
https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2020.115
No comments:
Post a Comment