Today's international political climate is volatile and dangerous. The United Nations can ease this tension through its sphere of influence on the world. The United Nations has the capability of pulling military forces from member states in order to prevent and deter conflicts that could possibly escalate towards violent warfare and an even more dangerous environment. It also has the capability of using these forces to end ongoing conflicts in different regions. Although the capacity of the use of these forces is limited due to constraints of contributing states, the UN should do everything it can to prevent today's political climate from becoming more dangerous for the planet, including using these forces under UN led military operations.
[...] Hence the UN will be ineffective in helping to resolve civil wars.”[8] This is a less then optimistic generalization when it comes to the UN's ability to use force effectively. This brings us back to the role of the UN in the first place. Perhaps the doctrine of the UN should be one of non-use of force. However relying on contributing states and regional institutions to conduct UN operations outside of the UN command could lead to many drawbacks. The importance of the UN leading and commanding these military operations is that it is a symbol of international authority bearing down on the inhumanities of the day. [...]
[...] A code of conduct should be taught to security and police forces who are in the region as a long term occupier. This code should be upheld by peacekeepers themselves and should be adaptable to cultural environments. I hope that these recommendations are reviewed and accepted as policy for the sake of future operations. The UN is still in its early stages and will one day be the great peace keeping force that it set out to be. Until then the use or non- use of force by the United Nations should be carefully regulated and [...]
[...] The risk of failure in these instances should be minimized to its fullest and the use of these forces should be authorized not only by members of the Security Council, but also by the contributing states involved. If the state is willing to take the risk and the UN agrees, then a state has the right to intervene in a conflict even with its limited capabilities. My recommendation is that regional forces be supplied by groups such as ASEAN, the African League, NATO, and the European Union's Quick Reaction Force. [...]
[...] This escalation of force proved to be fair warning to Serb forces of what was to come if the war continued.[2] The overwhelming use of firepower and the escalation of force provided by NATO troops is an important reminder of how military successes are carried out. When deciding to use force in any UN operation these two important aspects cannot be stressed enough. Of course rapid decision making and international pressure for coalition partnership to quell the violence in the Balkans was also a key to the success of the operation. [...]
[...] The authorization of the use of force in this particular case should come directly from the Security Council and the Military Staff Committee, as it should for all other cases as well. The use of force should be laid out under clear understandable rules of engagement for all troops under UN command. As already laid forth in the UN charter no individual member of the United Nations can be denied the right to self defense.[6] Under UN authorization other criteria for the use of force may be laid out as well, depending on current circumstances in conflicted regions. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
