Transcript Peace-Keeping Operations

PEACE KEEPING
OPERATION (PKO)
Annisa Pratamasari
(070610057)
Yunita Rizki P
(070610400)
PEACEKEEPING?
•
•
Technique which has been developed to help
control and resolve armed conflict.
Field operations established by the UN, consent
of the parties concerned, to help control and
resolve conflict, under UN command and control,
expense collectively of the member state, military
and other personnel and equipment provided
voluntary, impartially between the parties and
using force to the minimum extent necessary.
United Nations Truce Supervision Organization
(UNTSO) 1st UNs PKO. It’s unarmed military.
Palestine, June 1948.
 United nations Emergency Force (UNEF) 1st
armed UNs force. Egypt, October 1956.

THE ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF
PEACEKEEPING
Peacekeeping operations were UNs operations
 Consent of the parties to the conflict
 Peacekeepers must be impartial between the
parties
 Troops required for UNs PKO
 Use of force

6 TYPE OF PKO
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Preventive deployment
Traditional peacekeeping
To support implementation of a comprehensive
settlement
To protect the delivery of humanitarian relief
supplies
The deployment of a UNs force in a country
where the institutions of state have largely
collapsed
Ceasefire enforcement
UNS PEACEKEEPING
2 conflicting ideas: UN as int’l actor & UNs
Peacekeeping has enjoyed some success after a
long period of mixed results
 Neutrality
 State participations
 Canada is an active UNs peacekeeper.

Born at the time when the Cold War rivalries
frequently paralyzed the Security Council
 UN peacekeeping goals were primarily limited to
maintaining ceasefires and stabilizing situations
on the ground, so that efforts could be made at
the political level to resolve the conflict by
peaceful means.

UN PEACEKEEPERS 1948-1990
number
country
total
operations
observer
missions
peacekeepin
g forces
1
Canada
17
9
8
2
Sweden
15
7
8
3
Ireland
13
7
6
4
Finland
12
6
6
5
Norway
12
7
5
10
USA
9
2
7
17
Indonesia
6
2
4
TOTAL PARTICIPATION
Country
PKO
Observer
Missions
Peace-keeping
forces
Canada
17
9
8
Sweden
15
7
8
Italy
11
6
5
USA
9
2
7
Brazil
7
4
3
Netherlands
7
4
3
UK
5
-
5
UN INTEVENTION AND RECURRING
CONFLICT
UN doubled the number for its peace keeping
operation since 1989  but it’s doesn’t mean they
succeeded in these operations.
 Indicator of failure  renewal of conflict, HR
violations, hostage taking.
 UN peacekeeping operations usually has had
short-term success...

UN INTERVENTION LEVEL
Passive diplomatic interventions
 Active diplomatic interventions
 Operational deployment

CAUSE OF FAILURE
Attacking the symptomps of a disease rather
than its cause
 Still using traditional peacekeeping approach
 Late to respond and take actions yet quick to
leave

THE CASES
Bosnia  parties were unwilling to cooperate
 Angola 91-92  succeed:fair elections. Failed:
after they leave, a new civil war began.
 Cyprus  30 years, but failed to resolve the
conflict
 Cambodia and Namibia  followed by peace
settlement
 Kashmir  no resolution until now

AFGHANISTAN CASE
Keeping anarchy at bay requires well-armed and wellplanned peacekeeping operations as a sign from the
international community that the world is watching and
ready to intervene—with force if necessary—to ensure
stability.
 Robust peacekeeping operations permit humanitarian
aid to get where it is needed
 After the War, US tried to maintain stability there 
facing problems such as rebel attack, poorly guarded
border..






UN sent its peacekeeping operations but US insisted
not to take the lead  mopping up  minimal
interference
ISAF (International Security Assistant Force)  mostly
funded and trained by US
As times goes by, debates raise between UN and US
about what to do next  prolong the presence of ISAF
vs. Train Afghan national military force.
the United States has the strongest reason to stay in
Afghanistan and see peacekeeping through. Without
U.S. leadership, a larger peacekeeping force for
Afghanistan will not be formed.
The United States cannot stand back and urge others
to donate troops to the mission if the U.S. government
does not do the same. Leadership requires
participation, but the U.S. troop contribution to an
expanded peacekeeping mission need not be very large.






Renala: Somalia, knp kok dilanggar? Gmn peran ICJ? Jk
kpntgn ud brlarut2 mk PKO bwt ap?
Icha: ICJ blm bs bertindak jk blm diminta. PKO hanya
menjaga perdamaian aj, blm nyelesaikan mslh scr lgsg.
Grace: ada transisi antara kekuatan dr yg slm ne
tradisional k liberal. Ap konsep PKO hanya bs dilakukan
tanpa UN? Ad g sih org int’l lain yg bs atasi?
Dea: PKO cocok utk konflik sprt ap n g cocok bwt yg sprt
ap?
Ziyad: istilah peace making ud g relevan so diganti PKO.
Klo PKO g bs nyelesaikan mslh, hny jaga aj,ap UN g
brusaha bwt cr peace keeping yg lbh nyata?
Tambahan dr Ziyad: otoritas PKO uda milik UN, jk ada
organisasi lain yg pke peace keeping, so istilah peace
keeping ud bkn lg milik otoritas UN.
Renala: seharusnya UN kasih waktu deadline.
Grace: brbicara mslh peace making-peace keepingpeace building. Siklusnya gak mesti. Tergantung
mslh yg terjadi.