faculteit: "FdR" en publicatiejaar: "2014"
| Auteur||T.P.R.R. Assaker|
|Titel||Using Force and Upholding Consent in UN Peace Operation: a Focus on UNIFIL|
|Faculteit||Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid|
|Opleiding||FdR MA International and European Law: Public International Law|
|Trefwoorden||International and European Law; Public International Law; peacekeeping; UN; use of force; consent; UNIFIL; Lebanon; armed groups|
|Samenvatting||The most common criticism made of United Nations-led peace operations is their lack of ability to resort to coercive action when necessary, in particular to protect civilians. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), first deployed in southern Lebanon in 1978, is no exception to this criticism. In an attempt to overcome this difficulty, after the war of the summer of 2006, the United Nations Security Council enhanced the mandate and granted more resources and means to the Force. Even though it is recognized that UNIFIL plays an important role for the stability of the region, the issues relating to its ability and will to resort to force in situations where it might be required to, are far from solved. This has an impact on the credibility and legitimacy of the mission in the eyes of the local population. The expression of their dissatisfaction goes from sarcastic comments being made about Blue Helmets being there to ‘count the number of foreign tanks invading Lebanon’ to civilians actually blocking and attacking UNIFIL vehicles.|
‘UNIFIL-II’ can be seen as the first massive participation in peacekeeping by European countries after the traumatising experiences in Somalia, Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. It is therefore crucial to understand whether or not we have learned lessons from the failures in past peace operations and, in a broader perspective, to what extent this tool provided by the collective security system is appropriate for - and capable of - providing durable peace in the Middle East and in other parts of the world that are struck by conflict.
The ability and will by peacekeepers to resort to coercive action is one of the key issues in that respect. Limited use of force in UN peacekeeping is intrinsically related to another aspect of this type of mission: the consent of the parties. This paper will attempt to set out the legal parameters relating to the use of force in a consensual UN peace operation, and will give special attention to the UNIFIL mission. After explaining the doctrine of UN peacekeeping (2) and analysing the historical and legal background behind the particular peace operation that is UNIFIL (3), my main research will focus on decrypting the attitudes of the several political actors of the Cedar country towards the UN mission (4), and confronting these with the right to use force by the Blue Helmets in southern Lebanon, using concrete examples from the field (5). UNIFIL will serve as the illustration of a problem that is not specific to it, as I will try to understand the complicated relationship that exists between consent and use of force in UN peace operations in general (6), before I conclude (7).
|Soort document|| scriptie master|
Gebruik dit adres om naar deze pagina te linken: /scriptie/499098
Vraag/opmerking over dit recordMail aan een collega
Toevoegen aan bewaarset