Chap. I, Article 2 of the UN Charter is based on the principle of sovereign equality of all nations that uphold the principles of the U.N. Under this principle and within the parameters established by the Charter, U.N. member states are granted equal standing and privileges in the organization regardless of real disparities. Therefore within the comity of nations when disputes arise, which require international intervention, the letter and spirit of the UN Charter with regards to peacekeeping missions must be followed. This essay explains the Chinese perspective on the issue of sovereign equality in UN peacekeeping operations.
China holds that any peacekeeping operation must respect the basic principle of sovereign equality of all nations. China believes in the Westphalian principles of territorial integrity and that such integrity must not be violated. This principle must be extended to the decision-making processes that mandate peacekeeping operations and the views and perspectives of all nations that form the UN must be taken cognizance of. During the Cold, War China felt that the instrument of peacekeeping operations was exploited as a tool by the superpowers to further their interests and not the interests of the nations involved. During the Korean War, the UN peacekeeping mandate in Korea was used as a tool to paint China as an aggressor despite the obvious dynamics of the situation. United Nations Operations in Congo (ONUC) typified US imperialism operating under the UN flag, encroaching upon the sovereignty of newly independent nations in the name of the UN.
Taiwan and Tiber are issues that intensely incense every Chinese. The current progression from peacekeeping to peace enforcing can well be twisted by the Superpower to infringe on China’s internal matters concerning Taiwan and Tibet through the excuse of UN peacekeeping operations. Between 1971 and 1981, China abstained from involving itself in any UN peacekeeping operations discussions because it considered at that time the Cold war dynamics as too divisive to arrive at a real consensus.
That is not to say that China does not support peacekeeping operations. It is a reality that countries in the world differ in size and larger nations have to take more responsibility to resolve issues that impinge on international stability and order. Where the cause has been just and the need to intervene inevitable, China has actively involved itself. For example in 1981, China contributed monetarily to the Cyprus peacekeeping operations. From there on China has consistently, taken part in every peacekeeping operation either through monetary or material support or in some cases direct involvement of its forces in Peacekeeping. This change has been necessitated as China realized that the only way to ensure that principles of national sovereignty are not violated with impunity was by engaging fully in all such missions. Also, China’s growing stature necessitates it to play a more proactive role in the global arena. In the case of Iraq, China had always supported the return of United Nations weapons inspections without preconditions. China had always stated that Baghdad should comply with all UN resolutions on weapons inspections and that Iraq’s sovereignty must be respected. However, China did not agree to the invasion of Iraq. This was clearly stated by the Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen, who cautioned the UNSC against taking hasty action on such a major question as authorizing some Member States to take military action against another Member State.
China has always supported the use of UN peacekeeping operations in their benign traditional roles. For example, in the case of the U.N. Operation in Mozambique (ONUMOZ), China was convinced that the two parties involved in the conflict in Mozambique were ready to resolve their problems through negotiations and that the help of the international community was welcome. In this case, China supported the resolution. Similarly, in Cambodia, the wide and disparate requirements and tasks mandated to the U.N. Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) that involved not only holding elections, supervising administration, disarming local militias but also all other broad-based actions required for nation-building were supported by China as a genuine case of peacekeeping operations with a widened scope of duties. In the extant case, China even contributed its military contingent of engineers and observers.
In Somalia, the absolute chaos that prevailed had to be tackled and even though the UN peacekeeping operation in Somalia was delegated to the U.S.-led United Task Force (UNITAF), China supported the motion. China, however, abstained on the issue of Rwanda as there was no real consensus amongst the affected parties in the way forward for a peacekeeping mission. Thus keeping in view the principle of national sovereignty, as also the fact that the Somalia experience was a disaster, China felt that intervening in Rwanda would only serve to increase instability.
The Balkans has proved to be a typical example from the Chinese perspective of how good intentions can be exploited for self-serving interests. The United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) created for Croatia was to be used judiciously. However, the UNPROFOR got involved in direct military action and the creation of the Rapid Reaction Force deprived the UNPROFOR of its status as an impartial international peacekeeping force that it was meant to be. Still hoping for the better, China supported the replacement of UNPROFOR with The Implementation Force (IFOR) and its last transformation as the Stabilization Force (SFOR) even though SFOR was operating under peace enforcement rules and not peacekeeping rules. China supported the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) as it felt that there was a need and necessity to stabilize the country. China contributed substantially to the mission of sending in military personnel to help stabilize the situation. The support was vindicated by the fact that UNAMSIL has been one of the rare successes where peace and stability have returned to the country because of UN peacekeeping operations.
China’s perspective on international peacekeeping operations and national sovereignty is quite unambiguous. China holds that peacekeeping operations must not, under any circumstances, undermine national sovereignty. Peacekeeping operations must not be used as a ploy to further hegemonic ambitions. Peacekeeping must not degenerate into coercive peace enforcement and impartiality. Nations that contribute to peacekeeping missions must have an equal say in the matters regarding the peace mission. It is a fact of life that some nations are large and some small and thus have different capability and capacities to contribute to peacekeeping missions. This fact must be understood and ‘aligned’ when deciding on the contours of a peace-keeping operation. Lastly, the principle of sovereign equality in peacekeeping operations must never be forgotten.