The UN as a Global Police Force and Negotiation Facilitator Essay

Introduction

Military conflicts are a primary cause for the formation of the majority of inter-governmental organizations (IGOs), and the United Nations (UN) is no exception. War has been the most pressing issue in global politics since the formation of the first human civilizations. Thus, the main objective of many IGOs is maintaining relative peace and ensuring security. States unite under the leadership of a certain inter-governmental institution and work together in order to solve conflicts in international politics. This way, they can ensure they remain secure in the global arena. It is evident that “despite being the most destructive century in human history, the twentieth was also the century of developing various governance approaches for preventing war.”¹ This essay is going to examine the limits and possibilities of the United Nations as a global police force and negotiation facilitator. The purpose of the paper is to address the failures and successes of the organization’s peace initiatives in an effort to evaluate its ability to ensure greater global security. It will especially center on the transformations in the nature of international conflicts as one of the biggest challenges the UN faces nowadays.

The Scope of the UN Authority

As the primary crisis-management institution in international politics, the United Nations is tasked with imposing binding regulations on all of the member states to ensure peace and maintain global security. The Security Council’s 15 members, only 5 of which are permanent and meet on a regular basis. Some of the subsidiary organs of the Council are ad hoc committees and global criminal tribunals. In addition, within the United Nations Secretariat, there are the Peacekeeping Operations and Operational Support departments, which organize field-based operations. Moreover, there is a relatively new Peacekeeping Commission, which was founded in 2005² to serve as an advisor on the best strategies and practices for maintaining global security. It is important to note its structure has remained relatively the same since its formation in the middle of the 20^th century³. This has been a topic of heated debate since the Council’s unchanged strategies and structure are regarded as the primary causes of the UN’s failure to efficiently respond to major military conflicts in Syria, Rwanda, and Crimea.

The scope of the United Nations’ authority in regards to policing international conflicts and negotiating is regulated by Chapter VI and Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Chapter VI authorizes the Security Council to act as a negotiator between parties in international disputes, using arbitration and a variety of other peaceful methods⁴. Chapter VII, on the other hand, allows the Council to impose sanctions and engage armed forces in an effort to restore peace⁵. It is apparent that such peacekeeping operations are the primary initiatives of the UN since, in mid-2020, the Security Council “was overseeing thirteen operations across three continents, involving a total of roughly one hundred thousand uniformed personnel”⁶. It is evident that the scope of the UN authority in regards to enforcement and negotiation is broad, which is why the organization’s actions, or the lack of them, are extremely impactful on the arena of global politics.

The Goals of the UN

The United Nations is arguably the most influential inter-governmental organization in the world, which is why it addresses a variety of issues that expand beyond national boundaries. Although the primary concern of those founding the UN was security and peace, the organization has soon adapted to the global environment and its problems. As a result, nowadays, the UN emphasizes “initial goals of safeguarding peace, protecting human rights, establishing the framework for international justice and promoting economic and social progress,”⁷ which are now accompanied by putting an end to global warming, AIDS, and the global refugee crisis. Nevertheless, peacekeeping operations and negotiations remain some of the most prioritized and visible initiatives of the organization.

On the one hand, it is self-evident that the issues the UN aims to solve are too large for any single state or a regional organization to deal with. Some states and regions do not have enough resources or influence in international politics to protect their people from hunger, diseases, and civil unrest. In addition, a conflict arising between different countries is doomed if there is no disinterested party coordinating a peaceful resolution. Thus, the problems the United Nations tries to solve warrant the power and the immense scope of responsibilities it possesses today.

On the other hand, the UN’s failure to ensure peace in some instances has led to an increasing number of arguments against universal action in favor of regional initiatives. The opposition claims that the specific problems can be resolved locally utilizing the influence of community institutions. In addition, global inter-governmental organizations such as the UN are criticized for the constant exploitation of collective frameworks by powerful members. For instance, some experts agree that some military conflicts are ignored by the UN because of their connection to one or multiple states with veto power. An example of this could be the Rwandan genocide⁸, which got overlooked because potential intervention went against the interests of the United States and France.

Regional organizations are considered an appealing alternative to global institutions such as the UN. The impact local initiatives can have is promising since regional institutions “have played an increasingly important role in peacekeeping and conflict resolution, in some cases prodding the council to action and in others acting as subcontractors on its behalf.”⁹ Some of the reasons behind the effectiveness of community-initiated solutions are the familiarity of the community with the sources of the conflict as well as people’s genuine investment in the resolution of local issues. Despite the attractiveness of regional organizations as a substitution for the United Nations in regards to peacekeeping, such institutions remain vulnerable. They have a high risk of becoming dominated by local powers, which can result in them abusing collective action for their own sinister purposes.

The Instruments of Enforcement and Containment

The United Nations’ primary instruments of conflict resolution include peacekeeping operations, humanitarian intervention projects, as well as nuclear disarmament. Since the 1950s, the organization has completed over 50 peace operations¹⁰ in an effort to efficiently respond to civil wars and other emergencies. By deploying peacekeepers, the UN generates opportunities for negotiations in land disputes, legalizes local peace agreements, and engages in reconciliation efforts. However, sometimes, the United Nations takes a more aggressive approach and combines military operations and civilian projects. Thus, a peacekeeper can be armed to protect refugees or civilians while being tasked with policing or legal administration in local institutions. Another tool for enforcement is collective sanctions used against states and non-state actors, which have violated the norms of international law.

Key Limitations of the Ability of the UN to Ensure Greater Global Security

The United Nations remains a vital tool for maintaining international peace and security. Nevertheless, the nature of conflict has changed significantly, with an increased number of instances of civil unrest and internalized tensions. The advancements in warfare methods and the growing involvement of powerful UN members in proxy wars¹¹ limit the capabilities of the organization in regards to intervention and containment. Conventional wars have almost ceased to exist, with non-state actors becoming more influential. Thus, the Security Council faces the challenge of holding authoritative leadership and non-state organizations accountable for various violations of customary international law. The UN’s shortfalls in Syria¹² are one of many examples of the limitations the organization faces due to its inability to tackle multi-faceted conflicts as well as the abuse of power by P-5 members. The United Nations needs to be reformed to face modern challenges. First, increasing the number of permanent members could ensure better representation of new regional superpowers. Second, the Security Council has to put some limitations on the use of the veto power. The likelihood of such changes is low since the P-5 members refuse to reduce their current power in the UN.

Conclusion

The United Nations is the world’s largest inter-governmental organization tasked with ensuring global peace and security. It has numerous effective tools and mechanisms for assisting with the aftermath of military conflict or conducting negotiations. However, the present structure of the institution makes it inefficient in addressing the current challenges of modern war. Thus, there is a need for organizational reform for the UN to remain a preserver of global security.

References

Council on Foreign Relations. “The UN Security Council.” CFR. 2020. Web.

Kalantar, Nina. “The Limitations and Capabilities of the United Nations in Modern Conflict.” E-International Relations. 2019. Web.

Karns, Margaret P., Mingst, Karen A., and Kendall W. Stiles. International Organizations: The Politics and Processes of Global Governance. 3rd ed. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2015. VitalSource.

Lakin, Samantha. “Lessons from the UN Peacekeeping Mission in Rwanda, 25 Years After the Genocide It Failed to Stop.”The Conversation. 2019. Web..

United Nations. “Global Issues Overview.” UN. 2020. Web.

Footnotes

1. Margaret P. Karns, Karen A. Mingst, and Kendall W. Stiles, International Organizations: The Politics and Processes of Global Governance, 3rd ed. (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2015), 282. VitalSource.
2. Council on Foreign Relations, “The UN Security Council,” CFR, 2020. Web.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. United Nations, “Global Issues Overview,” UN. 2020. Web.
8. Samantha Lakin, “Lessons from the UN Peacekeeping Mission in Rwanda, 25 Years After the Genocide It Failed to Stop,” The Conversation, 2019.
9. Council on Foreign Relations, “The UN Security Council”
10. Ibid.
11. Nina, Kalantar, “The Limitations and Capabilities of the United Nations in Modern Conflict,” E-International Relations, 2019. Web.
12. Ibid.