The United States, Russia, France and so play the United Nations peacekeeping operations, is really amazing!

Home > Military

The United States, Russia, France and so play the United Nations peacekeeping operations, is really amazing!

2016-07-21 21:44:03 429 ℃

Peace keeping is a key problem in Chinese society at present. Peacekeeping in its history, can be divided into two stages before the cold war and after the cold war. Since the United Nations in June 1948 to send the United Nations in the Middle East, the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization, the United Nations peacekeeping history has gone through 68 years. The peace keeping operations of the cold war are mainly to abide by the "agreement, neutrality and self defense" and the three principles of, who served as United Nations Secretary General Dag Hamasheld. To this day, the three principles are still seen on the United Nations peacekeeping website.

But the principle of this one, is not it really effective? Is not like some people in the media that can not be changed, is not being, scold not return?

We don't forget, Chinese and UN forces in Korea, fought a war. Of course, this war is the so-called United ally, on behalf of the United Nations, and China combat. The United Nations peacekeeping and not a concept. But the war reflects a problem, is still UN peacekeeping operations is the biggest Achilles heel: is UN peacekeeping operations relies heavily on country, and is easy to be power utilization and around; and more strange is, if there is no country leadership and involvement, the United Nations peacekeeping operations and exposure disadvantages inefficient and inaction.

Peacekeeping troops in Brazil

At the end of the cold war, due to the United Nations in North Korea to touch a badly beaten, so the United Nations had to admit that, in the U.S. - Soviet Cold War confrontation, Britain, France, middle power ranked the context, the ability of United Nations peacekeepers is extremely limited, not only the five permanent members of the UN Security Council on peacekeeping a thing quite cold, is the scale of peacekeeping force itself is also very small, mainly from the Nordic countries, Canada and Pakistan and other small countries.

But in the post Cold War, the United States, France, Russia see the United Nations in the "pretext" unique role, have been involved in UN peacekeeping operations. But these countries can not kind to working for the United Nations to help other countries, earn insignificant peacekeeping costs, but under the name of UN peacekeeping, by military means to serve the nation's interests.

First say the United states. In the Gulf War, the Iraqi troops occupied Kuwait after the fifth day, has been the temptation of U. S. President George H. W. Bush personally signed an order decided to impose "Desert Shield", a military action against Iraq.The United Nations Security Council has adopted 12 condemnation and sanctions against Iraq Resolution, UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar also on January 14, 1991 to Baghdad for peace. As a result, "fart is not."

In the George W. Bush period, the unilateral doctrine is more obvious. The United States at the time of the so-called United Nations reform, is to the United Nations to do what the United States wants it to do, the reform does not become the United States began to negative resistance."9. 11" after the incident, the United States has re adjusted the policy of the United Nations peacekeeping operations. Continue to implement the UN system and unilateral peacekeepingpolicy. In the war on terror, you see what the American soldiers on the battlefield wearing the most eye-catching "peacekeeping helmets?

Even in the Obama administration, although the United States due to the decline in strength, attitude has softened, but the United States has never, never fully embrace the UN and advocate multilateralism, the United Nations and its peacekeeping operations is only the realization means of the national interests of the United States. America's attitude to the United Nations peacekeeping: after eating!

Besides france. France from 1992 active participation in peacekeeping operations, but France is principled engagement. In other words, we must obey the France has its own specific political and military standards, participation depends on France's strategic priorities and France tried to defend the interests of the world.French participation in peacekeeping operations is more from their own national interests to consider and mainly rely on their own strength to implement and solve. In popular terms, it's good for France to do it, or I'm going to stay.For example, in Mali, the place is a traditional colony and sphere of influence in France. After the civil unrest in Mali, Mali and France in order to maintain in the African influence, actively participate in mali. France in UN authorization and the Malian government invited in 2013 deployed the French army launched against the terrorists serval action, and the joint part of the African forces to carry out military action.

Is France to launch a military action, but also to wait for terrorists to fight the terrorists?

China peacekeeping soldiers

Finally talk about the Russian peacekeeping. As the largest successor to the former Soviet Union, Russia's attitude towards peacekeeping, from the cold war did not participate in the transition to a limited participation,Russia in recognition of the United Nations peacekeeping authority at the same time, would shake their own arm, in the CIS countries sending troops, strengthen Russia in the presence of CIS in the military, maintain dominance of Russian "peacekeepers" name, against NATO's eastward expansion. Russia this themselves to their own forces wear helmets approach, by the western countries are widely criticized, but Russia still persist one's old ways. And the objective point of view, the independence of the United States and Russia in the CIS countries, not the abuse of force, but flexible use, indeed played a certain role in stabilizing the situation.

It seems that these powers are not cock "peacekeeping operations", always do, trend does not conform to the multilateralism, a bit not gentle magnanimous, should get most countries against it. But in essence, a lot of countries know with respect to multi passing constraints, restricted a lot of UN led peacekeeping force, dominant power "non normal peacekeeping" more effective.

This is the reason why, people know if the police know the dozen don't strike back, scold not return. On the bad guys not a deterrent, also maintain social security fart! If the police are "neutral", what is the use of the police?

Within the United Nations, between each country is difficult to achieve coordination, and in passing in a waste of time, leading world powers unilateral peacekeeping and military intervention, effective to restore order. Although this has brought the power of military intervention, weakening the sovereignty of some countries, but the United Nations peacekeeping can produce better results than low efficiency. For example in Mali Wei, is precisely the French military action after the withdrawal, result in a resurgence in combat terrorist forces, resulting in today's mess.

The so-called "consent, neutrality and self-defense" and the three principles, has long been questioned. UN peacekeeping troops and equipment self-defense weapons, attempt with neutral, non violent means to resolve regional conflicts, is simply not on the same wavelength.In the Congo crisis of 1960, the United Nations has taken measures to avoid excessive involvement in the conflict because of the neutrality principle. But such measures have in fact become the UN's hesitant to make the situation worse. Even the prime minister Lumumba was hijacked after the United Nations still not ready to consider military operations, until Prime Minister Lumumba was brutally murdered. This is a major blot on the history of the United Nations peacekeeping. You can say that the peace keeping force of the two party, whether or not the force involved, can maintain peace.

In 2000, submitted to the UN peacekeeping operations in high level group of the Brahimi report, the limits of force of peacekeepers proposed different opinions, especially the provide more security to the peacekeepers. But due to the United Nations peacekeeping mechanism inherent defects, simply increasing the force is not enough to solve the problem, but can not solve the ills of peacekeeping inefficient. Some experts pointed out that is either unable to, or too slow, lack of wisdom, or no execution of the 90s of the 20th century the United Nations action in the countries of Liberia, Iraq, Haiti, Sierra Leone, East Timor, Somalia, Rwanda and Bosnia are considered.

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon soldier

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, which began in 1978, has been stationed for 38 years. As of June 2014, the local presence of 11176 staff, 2013 to 2014 approved the budget of nearly 500 million yuan. Due to the instability of the local situation, such peacekeeping operations is not the end of the mission, and unable to find a solution, only as a long-term stationed peacekeeping force.

How is the significance of this peace? Is there a solution to the local problem?

Without the effective intervention of the great powers, the effect of the peace keeping operations is obvious to all.Although the great power is the use of the United Nations peacekeeping to maintain their own interests, but to some extent, this kind of subjective for themselves, the objective of the model, there may be a solution to the crisis in some areas of the effective way. The use of force is not a panacea, but without the interference of force is absolutely unacceptable.

This world is still a cruel jungle world. The United States, France, Russia and other countries of the United Nations peacekeeping attitude, let us into a deep thought. Many people may ask so many wars to take the innocent lives, there is no one to manage it? The problem is that some people come to the tube, which can only be a big country for their own interests in the use of force to interfere. If like a shackled United Nations peacekeeping this behavior, burdened with numerous limitations and frame, is destined to be the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. Military intervention is not right, but took the weapons out will solve the problem?

Sacrifice is not afraid, afraid of sacrifice is not worth, not reflect the interests of the state.Different countries, the views of the United Nations and peacekeeping is different. To treat the peace keeping, the great powers must have the strong will of the strategic interests of the great powers and the leading action.

As of April 2016, the United Nations recognized the five permanent members of the peacekeeping force: the United States 74 people, 302 people in the United Kingdom, 875 in France, 91 in Russia, 3042 in China.

This article is the author of the original. Without authorization, shall not be reproduced.