Preventive Action and the United Nations

The United Nations (UN) is an organization that operates under a complex international system based on sovereignty and territorial integrity. Consequently, establishing a world order without violating those international norms poses many difficulties for the UN. However, the responsibility of the UN to maintain peace through preventive action in the international system underlies an extensive partnership with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), regional organizations, such as the European Union and the African Union, and nation-states. Gareth Evans quotes in the chapter “Preventive Action and Conflict Resolution” in Peacemaking and Peacekeeping for the New Century that “While there will continue to be a major, and growing, role for regional organizations…overwhelmingly the major responsibility for doing better [at preventive action] is going to have to be borne by the UN…” (87).

The UN has established itself as the center for conflict resolution, preventive action, and peacekeeping, which means the responsibility of regional organizations and NGOs in the area of preventive action must draw on the norms of the UN. When looking at the UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL), it is clear that, even though the UN takes major responsibility for establishing peace, the willingness of regional organizations and NGOs contributes greatly to this continued peace. However, the cohesive action seen with the regional organizations and NGOs is partly due to their adherence to UN regulations and guidelines. Consequently, the UN is the core organization for preventive action and peacekeeping in the international system, and therefore, it is responsible for improving peacekeeping methods thereafter.

The failure of collective security after WWI and the horrors experienced thereafter in WWII demonstrated the need for a core organization built on adherence to the protection of sovereignty and human rights. John Roper states the end of the Cold War “…has brought about a renaissance of the multilateral imperative, the desire to find multilateral solutions to problems of international relations and security” (Roper 255). The UN attributes itself as a non-coercive, neutral organization with limited military capability and a strong interposition force (Lecture 4). Nonetheless, since its establishment in 1945, the UN has been faced with many changes in the international system, most notably the fall of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), causing the formation of a Unipolar international system.

This transcendence, with the atrocities of Bosnia/Herzegovina and Rwanda in the 1990s, has questioned the validity and effectiveness of the UN as a peacekeeping organization. However, the increasing importance of regional organizations and NGO’s and their willingness to step into conflicts has allowed the UN to overcome the many complex issues in the new international system. Evans notes that inevitably “Disputes themselves will continue to arise… and… they will do so with greater frequency and in more complex formulations, as the recent rapid growth of intrastate disputes suggests” (Evans 61). The change that came with the emergence of a Unipolar international system created an undesirable need for third-world states by the superpowers, since territorial claims and proxy wars meant little to the United States and Russia at the Cold War’s end.

In order to tackle this pervasive issue, the UN needs to commission a high volume of analytical study of major regions of the world where conflicts are prone to arise. The studies must focus on the geopolitical, ethnic, economic, and anthropological aspects of the state, while focusing on the possible UN strategies to addressing the problems. By understanding the reasons for violence and conflict, the UN can develop strategies addressing the specific issues and conflicts and can profligate a more rapid and efficient response.

Typically, the Secretary-General does not analyze a specific conflict until violence has reached impermissible levels and a peace-agreement has been brokered. This approach puts a time constraint on possible preventive action, which inadvertently limits the possibility of a strong and respectable peacekeeping force. Consequently, the security on the ground may be compromised, which Steven Stedman notes in Ending Civil Wars “…there cannot be…the holding of elections, reempowerment of civil society, establishment of political accountability, and redevelopment of the economy; many areas in which the UN must focus their analytical studies (Stedman 141). The abovementioned is an improvement that must be taken by the UN regardless of the economic cost to the organization because ultimately in doing so, the UN may be able to allocate resources more efficiently.

The need for improvement in preventive action from the UN increases as conflicts continue to arise throughout the world, most notably in Africa where conflicts in Central and West Africa continue to destabilize the region. The UN has to continue to adapt to changes in the international system and the conflicts that arise therein. The presence of spoilers in conflicts, and the complexities with curbing violence in a collapsed state have exacerbated the UN in the area of preventive action; however, regional organizations and NGOs have provided much support in these areas. NGOs in Liberia have been able to focus in areas such as education, health, safety, and the rebuilding of decimated villages, thus the possibilities of a stable and economically sustainable society increase.

Regional organizations such as the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) can provide numerous troops to the conflict area, help with logistics support for peacekeeping forces, and aid infrastructure building. The UN must take advantage of the many possibilities for effective deployment, as well as the collective action of states contributing to peacekeeping operations. However, the UN must also stay clear of relying heavily on outside organizations to provide this support. By making the many necessary improvements, the UN can provide a central guideline to outside organizations to substantiate the preventive action process. Fundamentally, it is through the UN that progress and improvement must be made, mostly for the reason that the UN is the center for conflict resolution after conflicts have not been resolved, and peacekeeping is commissioned. Evans notes that “…in a great many cases, disputes both can and should be satisfactorily managed and resolved without recourse to the UN, through cooperation at the bilateral, subregional, or regional level” (Evans 71).

UNMIL operations have sustained peace in Liberia since August 2003, and have been able to allow for the free election of President Sir-Leaf Johnson in 2005 (Security Council (2008) 11). Evans’ concluding quote in the instance of UNMIL operations is substantial given that ECOWAS was unable to sustain the subsequent peace agreement between the rival factions and the Liberian government. In this instance, the regional organization ECOWAS was unable to maintain peace in Liberia because of the complexity of the issues involved. The UN operates on a much higher international level than regional organizations and NGOs, and therefore, has a much greater base to support preventive action and peacekeeping operations. The operational capacity of ECOWAS forces in Liberia prior to UNMIL deployment was limited to urban regions, making smaller villages and areas more prone to corruption and violence. However, after UNMIL deployed its international peacekeeping force to the region, the smaller rural areas were subsequently protected by peacekeeping forces. The UN was able to establish funding from the international community and from financial organizations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

In conclusion, because the UN is the core organization for preventive action and peacekeeping, the responsibility for improving preventive action is an imperative. Evans’ quote merely attests to the immense responsibility that the UN has to the international community, and that by relying to heavily on regional organizations the UN hinders the possibility for correction within itself. By focusing on correction within the UN, preventive action may have a more firm effect in conflict-ridden areas, which may lead to a deterrence of violence. By commissioning a plethora of analytical studies of conflict regions and regions prone to conflict, the UN may be able to provide a more effective strategy to preventive action and peacekeeping implementation. This will help regional organizations to deter violence and conflict prior to UN operations, and will make preventive action more sustainable. The UN must also continue to adapt to the changes in the international system before problems arise that may deplete the UN’s respectability across the world. Furthermore, Evans’ conclusive quote makes an incisive point that preventive action must ultimately be honed and improved by the UN in order for peacekeeping to continue unabated