United Nations Peacekeeping: Bridging the Capabilities-Expectations Gap
In: Politologický časopis, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 81-84
ISSN: 1211-3247
In: Politologický časopis, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 81-84
ISSN: 1211-3247
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 47, Heft 3, S. 29-52
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
The issue of international human rights norms which have not yet been fully established within the existing international human rights standard belongs at present to the essential components of the UN Human Rights Council agenda. Based on a synthesis of legal and political notions of the process of emergence of human rights norms, the paper attempts to clearly define and classify these emerging norms, which are sometimes called "new" human rights. At the same time it focuses on individual emerging human rights that are included on the Council's agenda, examines the stages they reached in the international norm cycle and briefly discusses the tools used by the UN Human Rights Council to achieve progress in this respect and turn the norms in statu nascendi into full international standards. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 38, Heft 3, S. 24-43
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
This article provides an analysis of the of United Nations (UN) peacekeeping, one of the hottest topics in international politics of the post-cold war era. Numerous books, articles, and Ph.D. thesis have already been written about UN peacekeeping operations. Although differing vastly in their scope and quality, most of the recent critiques have pointed out the pressing need to re-define and strengthen the cold war era concept of UN peacekeeping so that it becomes a viable conflict resolution method in the 21st century. Some scholars have, however, expressed serious doubts about the actual conflict resolution capabilities of UN peacekeeping operations. They argue that premature, short-tenn and under funded UN peacekeeping operations may well do more damage than good. One of the few things the majority of conflict resolution scholars and practitioners can nowadays agree on is that no UN intervention can bring peace to a place where it is not wanted.This article aims to enrich the current peace research by introducing an alternative analytical approach to the study of the UN peacekeeping. It is divided into seven sections. The introduction is followed by a theoretical section where I briefly summarize two basic theoretical approaches to the study of the UN peacekeeping (Conflict Management & Conflict Resolution). The third section provides an analysis of the changing nature of armed conflicts in the post-cold war period. The fourth section deals with the adjustments that were made to the concept of UN peacekeeping operations in reaction to the changes in the nature of current armed conflicts. The analytical concept Capabilities versus Expectations Gap is introduced in the fifth chapter, followed by the core section of this article -- the analysis of the United Nations peacekeeping using the analytical concept Capabilities versus Expectations Gap. The analytical concept Capabilities versus Expectations Gap was first introduced by Christopher Hill in 1992 as a handy tool for analyzing the evolving European Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The unique advantage of this concept is that it provides a sensible assessment of both the actual and potential UN capabilities. By comparing these with the existing UN expectations, the Capabilities versus Expectations Gap analysis of UN peacekeeping enables us to sketch a more realistic picture of what the UN is capable of doing in the area of conflict resolution than that presented either by its more enthusiastic supporters or by the demanders among the UN Member States. Consequently, building further on this realistic picture of the UN conflict resolution capabilities, I attempt to answer the key research question of this article: Is the UN, with the current level of its conflict resolution capabilities, capable of providing high quality treatment to as many conflicts as it nowadays attempts to provide? Based on the findings of the Capabilities versus Expectations Gap analysis of the UN peacekeeping problematic, I argue that since the end of the cold war, the UN has several times attempted to carry out more peacekeeping operations than it was capable of performing well in light of the current level of its conflict resolution capabilities. In other words, the most important conclusion of this article is that there is a gap between the UN capabilities and expectations in the area of conflict resolution and that the only option how to bridge this gap in the foreseeable future is to decrease the excessive UN expectations to meet the currently available UN capabilities. As paradoxical as it may sound, in practical terms this means that the United Nations is nowadays more likely to succeed in meeting its basic function ("to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war") by carrying out fewer but high quality peacekeeping operations. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 143-157
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
This article offers a comprehensive analysis of the perils & benefits of peacekeeping privatization by approaching two key questions. Firstly, can private military companies (PMCs) take on peacekeeping functions consistent with the UN Charter's primary objective "to save future generations from the scourge of war?" And secondly, is peacekeeping privatization really an option for bridging the UN's peacekeeping capabilities-expectations gap? PMCs' past performances here offer no clear-cut answers for the first question. Critics have doubted their cost-effectiveness, accountability & legitimacy, while proponents have argued their cost-effectiveness, feasibility & professionalism over their UN and/or regional counterparts. On the second question, PMCs posses many capabilities necessary for peacekeeping operations that the UN often lacks. Yet the question remains how far privatization should extend, with the danger of it going too far too fast, causing PMC peacekeeping to become a substitute for, rather than an enhancement of, UN action. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 44, Heft 1, S. 66-85
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
The enforcement of obligations in international relations is not governed by a supranational authority; sanctions (economic, diplomatic, communication) represent one of the possible ways in which a state may put through its rights and interests. The group of economic sanctions is very wide, and it covers measures affecting trade or financial flows (e. g. boycotts, embargoes, prohibitions on investment, payments and capital movements, withdrawal of tariff preference). The text concerns multilateral sanctions regimes applied by the United Nations and the European Union. The paper describes procedures leading to the authorization of sanctions and the circumstances under which the restrictive measures are usually applied. In both cases, the main development and widest use of sanctions occurred in the 1990s. Current economic measures are set with regard to the basic needs of common people, and they should only target the responsible elites (smart sanctions). Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 43, Heft 3, S. 22-46
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
UN peacekeeping operations are viewed as a relevant instrument of conflict resolution in the post-Cold War era. A significant part of them operates in Africa, the place with the largest "demand" for conflict resolution. Why are some operations successful, while others not? What are the determinants of their success? The author focuses on six determinants relevant for the outcome of peacekeeping operations: support of the UN Security Council, a clear & feasible mandate, equipment & size of the operation, duration of the operation, will of the belligerents to end the conflict peacefully & support of an African regional organization. Based on case studies representing ten UN peacekeeping operations in Africa, the author evaluates the determinants of success & thus shows the difficult striving of UN peacekeeping for success. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 48, Heft 1, S. 5-26
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
Due to the different and mutually incompatible interpretations of Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, there is still an ongoing dispute between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain on the question of the sovereignty of Gibraltar. In the United Kingdom's view, which is largely shared by legal scholars, Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht grants full and entire sovereignty over Gibraltar to the UK. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Spain argues that Article X yielded to the crown of Great Britain only the property of Gibraltar's castle, town and port. Sovereignty over Gibraltar, however, continued to be retained by the Spanish state. In spite of their disagreement, both states started negotiating a form of condominium at the beginning of the 21st century. In the end, they failed to achieve this goal, which seems to be incompatible with the UN General Assembly resolutions on the decolonization of Gibraltar. The people of Gibraltar, who are the third actor in the Spanish-British dispute, claim their own sovereignty and their right to self-determination. However, according to the UN General Assembly, the decolonization of Gibraltar requires as a precondition that the Kingdom of Spain and the UK solve their dispute on the question of sovereignty. Otherwise the decolonization of Gibraltar cannot occur. Both the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain are European Union members but their inter-state dispute under international law cannot be solved within the EU context. Thus, three hundred years after the signature of the Treaty of Utrecht, the future of Gibraltar remains completely unclear. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 23-48
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
This article deals with the rules of power distribution and the delegation of power in international security organizations. More specifically, the paper describes and evaluates the delegation of power in the security regimes of the UN, NATO, and the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The paper proceeds from a hypothesis drawing on existing research. According to this hypothesis, the security regime of the UN is marked by a substantial delegation of power, but we can observe only weak power delegations in NATO and the CFSP. So while the UN's security regime can be considered supranational, NATO and the CFSP represent intergovernmental regimes. The analysis carried out in this paper confirms the hypothesis. In comparison with existing literature, however, the paper submits much more precise and concrete findings. Moreover, the paper also forwards a rather unique conceptual and methodological approach for studies of power distribution in international organizations (IOs). In this way, it contributes towards the general study of IOs, which is currently rather stagnant. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 47, Heft 1, S. 60-82
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
This article discusses the growing role of China in UN peacekeeping operations since 1989. First, the reasons for the non-engagement of China after its admission to the UN and its Security Council in 1971 are described to stress the difference of the Chinese behavior after the end of the Cold War. Second, the increasing Chinese activity in UN peacekeeping is shown by describing China's gradually changing behavior in three areas: voting in the Security Council, personnel contributions to peacekeeping operations and financial contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget. In the end, the article suggests that China's growing role in UN PKO could be understood as an important part of China's peaceful rise policy. Adapted from the source document.
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 14, Heft 6, S. 3-8
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
World Affairs Online
Příspěvek přednesený profesorem Hubou, současným předsedou výboru pre pôdohospodárstvo a životné prostredie Národní rady SR, na česko-slovenské Konferenci o udržitelném rozvoji a ústupu v Olomouci (8.11. 2012) hodnotí vývoj v oblasti životního prostředí z perspektivy uplynulých 25 let (od r. 1987, kdy vznikla Zpráva komise OSN pro životní prostředí a rozvoj s názvem Naše společná budoucnost, tzv. Zpráva Brundtlandové), či dokonce 40 let (v r. 1972 se konala Stockholmská konference o životním prostředí člověka). Rekapituluje jeho nejdůležitější milníky, kterých byl autor aktivním účastníkem, a to na úrovni globální, evropské, a v rámci Slovenska – v období jeho významných celospolečenských proměn. Kam tento vývoj směřuje – to je řečnická otázka, jejíž odpověď stále méně ovlivňují ti, kterým na budoucnosti opravdu záleží.(Z príspevku na česko-slovenskej konferencii o udržateľnom rozvoji a ústupe v Olomouci, 8.11. 2012) ; This paper, presented by Professor Huba, the current Chairman of the Committee for Agriculture and the Environment of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, at the Czecho-Slovak Conference on Sustainable Development and Retreat in Olomouc (8 Nov 2012), evaluates the development in the environmental sphere from the perspective of the past 25 years (since 1987, when the report Our Common Future from the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, known as the Brundtland Report, was published), or even 40 years (Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment was held in 1972). It recapitulates its major milestones, in which the author was actively involved at the global, European and Slovak levels at the time of a major society-wide transformation in Slovakia. Where this development leads is a rhetorical question the answer to which is less and less influenced by those to whom future really matters.
BASE
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Band 42, Heft 4, S. 73-82
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
A review essay on books by (1) Daniel H. Deudney, Bounding Power: Republican Security theory from the Polis to the Global Village, 1st edition (Princeton: Princeton U Press, 2006); & (2) Robert Kagan, Dangerous Nation: America's Place in the World from Its Earliest Days to the Dawn of the Twentieth Century, 1st edition (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006).
World Affairs Online
In: Mezinárodní vztahy: Czech journal of international relations, Heft 2, S. 43-49
ISSN: 0543-7989, 0323-1844
World Affairs Online