As the global community continues to progress towards nationalism, the most asked question is: are world institutions necessary to kept around? International institutions such as the UN were implemented to sustain global order by allowing for states to participate and comply with international rules and regulations. However, enforcing regulations can jeopardize sovereignty of member states. It is difficult for world institutions, like the UN, to establish credibility when there is no legitimate enforcement department. Although the UN peacekeepers hold titles of soldiers, their duty is not to enforce the laws, but to monitor and pacify areas.
Asutesserre compares the square foot coverage of soldier per land of US soldiers vs UN peacemakers and the difference remains at large. 1 peacemaker can cover 400 square miles in Western Sahara, 50 square miles in Congo, and 30 square miles in South Sudan; compared to US soldiers who covers 2 square miles in Afghanistan. There is not enough funding for supplies and equipment. The chain of command can also become quite confusing since peacemakers do not only have to report to the UN, but also the countries military they are inhabiting. These factors discourage from seeing a brighter future in UN peacemakers.
Although there are proposals in reconstructing UN peacemakers rather than eliminating it completely, I believe it is not useful. My answer remains unchanged regarding any international policy/organizational change; things will not change unless there is support from the international community. Without their funding, political support, and active participation, UN peacemakers will continue to have difficulties carry on their mission of “enforcing” global regulations. However, countries will continue to not comply due to economic, political, and social differences.
One reply on “Week #7:”
Karine,
This is a thoughtful blog post. The UN peacekeeping operation has been problematic almost from its inception. As you rightly point out, it is seriously under-funded and, as a result, there frequently aren’t enough soldiers to make a difference and actually keep the peace! But beyond that, there “rules of engagement” often have not even allowed them to intervene to stop extreme violence. Perhaps the best example was in Rwanda in the 1990s when the UN peacekeepers stood by helplessly while Hutus slaughtered Tutsis right in front of them. This led to a new UN policy of “The Responsibility to Protect.” Yet they still do not have sufficient funding or soldiers. –Professor Wallerstein