What to do and what not to do? Comparative analysis of two peace enforcement operations in Somalia (1992-1993 and 1993-1995).
Peace operations have become the most widely used tool for conflict management, therefore, a vast range of different military operation types was invented, e.g. observer mission, peacekeeping, peace enforcement. The last type of operations became widely used due to the fact that there is no consent of the belligerent parties needed to conduct a mission, for instance, the humanitarian intervention in Libya is the most recent and prominent example, plus, in general it is considered to be effective - according to Virginia Page Fortna, peace enforcement is effective in 58.33% of cases1 (post-Cold War period). However, the question of factors contributing to the success\failure of such type of interventions was not addressed so far in the literature; consequently, it will constitute my research question. The sub-question tackles the importance of certain variables in the affect on efficacy of the operation. For this outcome controlled and interfering variables as the number of soldiers in the contingent, amount of resources, external actors involved, sanctions, composition of contingent, cooperation with INGOs and local NGOs will be assessed. To be able to answer the question mentioned above, the research will be structured in a following way: firstly, definitions of ‘peace enforcement’ will be assessed and its main features, for example, amount of force implemented for conflict regulation, level of consent of belligerent parties and degree of impartiality of peace enforcers, and the practices it comprises. Then the criterion for the efficiency will be set up. Afterwards the comparative analysis of two case studies will be implemented to reveal the most significant variables, crucially affecting the outcome of this type of peace operations. Cases of peace enforcement in Somalia in 1992-1993 and 1993-1995 seem to be the most suitable for the purpose of the research, as both of them were conducted by the USA with its leading contingent under the auspices of the UN, had similar mandates, amount of force, resources, but the second operation failed to complete its tasks.
Peace enforcement: the middle ground between peacekeeping and large-scale military actions The debates on the topic of peace enforcement were set up only after the introduction of this concept by Boutros Boutros-Ghali in the report of the UN Secretary-General “Agenda for peace” (1992), implicitly distinguishing it from other peace operations. However, the practice of peace enforcement operations could be traced back to 1950 (interference of UN into Korean War is recognized by most scholars as the first example). Strong antagonism between socialistic and Western blocks in the bipolar system, influencing the work of the UN SC, could be said as one of the reasons of the late introduction of this concept, postponed until the dissolution of the USSR. However, this topic received a lot of attention in 90-s, regarded in the light of concrete operations taking place at that time mostly in Africa and in Europe, thereby, it has well-developed theoretical framework. Consequently, there are different approaches to the definition of peace enforcement operations. According to the definition of Coleman, peace enforcement operations represent forcible military interventions by one or more state into a third country with the express objective of maintaining or restoring international, regional or local peace and security by ending violent conflict within that country2. Meanwhile, Mohamed Awad Osman proposes two definitions encompassing the whole range of activity peace enforcement presupposes. Peace enforcement comprises3:
1) Forcible collective military operation, authorized by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter, for the purpose of restoring compliance with international norms following a major breach of the peace or...
References: 1. Allen, R. Lessons from Somalia: The Dilemma Of Peace Enforcement\http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/Allen.htm
2. Betts, Richard K. “The Delusion of Impartial Intervention,” Foreign Affairs, (Nov-Dec 1994): 20-33.
3. Butler M.J. International conflict management: an introduction. Routledge. 2009
4. K.P.Coleman. International Organisations and Peace Enforcement. The Politics of International Legitimacy. 2007. University of British Columbia, Vancouver
5. Easton Jr. Somalia: key operational considerations and implications in an era of peace enforcement and forced humanitarian assistance ventures\http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA266740&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
6. Fortna V.P.. 2004. Does peacekeeping keep peace? International intervention and the duration of peace after civil war. Internationsl Studies Quaterly, 48, pp.269-292
7. McDonald, G. Peace enforcement: the Middle ground. \ http://www.unige.ch/cyberdocuments/theses2001/McDonaldG/these.html
8. Osman M.A. The United Nations and peace enforcement: wars, terrorism and democracy. Ashgate. 2002
9. Documents from the official UN web-site (resolutions, reports of special missions, reports of Secretary General, etc.)
Please join StudyMode to read the full document