Peace Enforcement Case Study

1224 Words5 Pages
Peace Enforcement: Conceptual Background Peace enforcement can be most simply defined as the use of military force to compel peace in a conflict, generally against the will of those combatants. To do this, it generally requires more military force than peacekeeping operations, and is authorized under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. All peace operations can be generally termed under an umbrella term called Peace Support Operations that is a relatively new term in the public discourse. The scale and type of tasks differ from conflict prevention; peacebuilding; peacekeeping; peacemaking; peace enforcement, the maintenance of law and order, the repatriation of refugees, disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR), the direct administration…show more content…
One such thinker is Sir Brian Urquhart, a man who made a great contribution to ‘classical’ UN peacekeeping. Urquhart has admitted that "... the inability of the Security Council to enforce its decisions in less conventional military situations] is the most serious setback for the world organization since the end of the cold war." He adds that the "capacity to deploy credible and effective peace enforcement units ... could make a decisive difference in the early stages of a crisis." Such pro-intervention arguments are almost always based on ethics. In a humanitarian emergency, it is morally reprehensible to stand by and do nothing, even if the only way to intervene effectively requires lethal force. On the other hand, the anti-intervention argument is based on pragmatism, focusing as it does on what is possible and effective, rather than what is right. The way to move forward is clearly to unify these positions by focusing on what is both right and…show more content…
This is the chapter under which the Security Council makes decisions that are enforceable, including the imposition of economic sanctions and the taking of military action. A Chapter VII operation, in contrast to a Chapter VI operation, may therefore be authorized to use force beyond self-defense for enforcement purposes. This understanding was confirmed by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in July 1962 when it ruled that, while the UN has an inherent capacity to establish, assume command over and employ military forces, these may only exercise ‘belligerent rights’ when authorized to do so by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII. This ruling suggests that the use of force by a Chapter VI peacekeeping operation beyond self-defense is illegal under the UN Charter. Along with impartiality and the consent of the parties, the self-defence rule may thus be seen as a key criterion that distinguishes peacekeeping from peace
Open Document