The article includes an analysis of the peace mission in Lebanon with the participation of the Polish Military Contingent. The organizational structure of the military health service securing our soldiers in that mission was also presented, bearing in mind the initial intended use of Polish units in this mission. The article is looking for an answer to the question about the importance of participation in peacekeeping missions of the Polish Armed Forces. It is also a description of the first mission in Lebanon, with a view to the re-participation of Polish troops in the mission at the end of 2019. Poland is considered a responsible member of NATO and the European Union.
The article discusses the experience of creation of peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eastern Slavonia, Kosovo and East Timor with the use of comparative method. It also raises the role of international and regional actors in post-conflict peacebuilding. The author presents some practical solutions for the implementation of the effective peace process in eastern Ukraine, aimed at the reintegration of temporarily occupied territories.
The aim of article is describe the issues of uses an armed forces in peacekeeping operations and their influence on global security. Need to respond rapidly to security risks and difficulties in resolving disputes and conflicts through diplomacy have made it increasingly important nowadays peacekeeping missions. The decision to use the armed forces during these operations is usually difficult, lengthy and involves many considerations. Moreover, military operations are subject to political control and close supervision by the public. Modern peacekeeping operations are characterized by complex and multi–faceted action. These include military action, political, economic, social and cultural. The primary objectives of these missions should be civilian–military cooperation, close coordination at international level and at the national level. The main aim of the involvement of armed forces in peacekeeping operations has become primarily to reduce the wars and conflicts of the modern world. In retrospect participation of soldiers in peacekeeping operations is an important element in ensuring security in current international environment ; Konieczność szybkiej reakcji na zagrożenie bezpieczeństwa oraz trudności przy rozwiązywaniu sporów i konfliktów za pomocą dyplomacji sprawiły, że coraz większego znaczenia nabierają obecnie misje pokojowe. Podjęcie decyzji o użyciu sił zbrojnych podczas tych operacji jest zazwyczaj trudne, długotrwałe i obarczone wieloma uwarunkowaniami. Działania wojsk podlegają ponadto kontroli politycznej oraz szczególnemu nadzorowi ze strony opinii publicznej. Współczesne operacje pokojowe charakteryzują się działaniem kompleksowym i wieloaspektowym. Obejmują one działania wojskowe, polityczne, ekonomiczne, społeczne oraz kulturowe. Do podstawowych założeń tych misji należy współpraca cywilno–wojskowa, ścisła koordynacja działań na szczeblu międzynarodowym oraz na szczeblu narodowym. Zasadniczym celem angażowania sił zbrojnych w operacje pokojowe stała się przede wszystkim chęć ograniczenia wojen i konfliktów we współczesnym świecie. Patrząc z perspektywy czasu udział żołnierzy w operacjach pokojowych stanowi ważny element zapewnienia bezpieczeństwa we współczesnym środowisku między– narodowym.
Abstract: Peacekeeping missions have become part of international policy as one of the main mechanisms used in resolving conflicts that threaten the global security. Poland regularly participates in such activities. The article presents the essence and history of Polish participation in peacekeeping missions. An analysis of the efforts taken by the Polish military contingent during the activities carried out under the auspices of the European Union and the North Atlantic Alliance has also been performed. ; Streszczenie: Misje pokojowe wpisały się w politykę międzynarodową jako jeden z głównych mechanizmów wykorzystywanych przy rozwiązywaniu konfliktów zagrażających bezpieczeństwu światowemu. Polska regularnie współuczestniczy w tych działaniach. W artykule przedstawiono istotę i historię partycypacji Rzeczpospolitej w misjach pokojowych. Dokonano także analizy wysiłków Polskiego Kontyngentu Wojskowego dotyczącej działań prowadzonych pod auspicjami Unii Europejskiej oraz Sojuszu Północnoatlantyckiego.
Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law. ; Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.
Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.
After the death of Josip Broz Tito, national, religious and economic problems of Yugoslavia led to the collapse of the state. Its beginning was given by the 1989 constitutional amendments which strenghtened Serbia and limited the autonomy of Kosovo and Vojvodina, causing annoyance of Slovenia and Croatia. Despite objection of its neighbours, Slovenia declared its independence already on December 26th, 1990. Attainment of independence by Croatia, declared on June 25th, 1991, was accompanied by many difficult challenges and by determined domestic and international counteractions. Federal authorities launched a military operation, taking control of a considerable area of Croatia. United Nations Security Council took necessary steps to keep peace and safety in Yugoslavia but unsatisfactory progress in negotiations and determined actions of the conflicted parties paralyzed effectively the UN forces, especially until 1996. The situation was even more difficult in Bosnia-Herzegovina, inhabited by the Bosnian Muslims, Serbs and Croats. Here, the concept of independence matured more slowly and the conflict between Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats was growing very fast. In May 1992, as a result of the fighting, most of the UN observers had to withdrawn to the security zone in Croatia. The conflicted parties were more and more agressive and didn't comply with UN Security Council resolutions. In the beginning of 1994 the UN actions in Bosnia were decisively supported by NATO. The Serbs took UN hostages. Intense fights, continued until the end of 1995, showed the weakness of the UN security and peace system. The situation in Macedonia and Kosovo developed more favourably, even though the UN was forced to deply the "blue helmets". On March 31st, 1995, preventive forces were formed in Macedonia and on July 6th, 1998, in Kosovo, the Diplomatic Observer Mission, supported by UN, OSCE, UE and NATO, was established. Those actions influenced combating the situation in the Balkans, even if it is still unstable, especially in Kosovo and in Macedonia ; Problemy narodowościowe, religijne i gospodarcze Jugosławii doprowadziły, po śmierci Josipa Broz-Tity, do rozpadu państwa. Jego początek dały zmiany konstytucyjne w 1989 roku, wzmacniające Serbię, a ograniczające autonomię Kosowa i Wojwodiny, co wywołało niezadowolenie Słowenii i Chorwacji. Pomimo sprzeciwu sąsiadów, Słowenia już 26 grudnia 1990 roku ogłosiła niepodległość. Uzyskaniu niepodległości przez Chorwację, ogłoszonej 25 czerwca 1991 roku, towarzyszyło wiele trudnych wyzwań i zdecydowanych przeciwdziałań wewnętrznych, jak i sąsiedzkich. Władze federalne wszczęły operację wojskową, opanowując znaczne obszary Chorwacji. Dla utrzymania pokoju i bezpieczeństwa w Jugosławii Rada Bezpieczeństwa ONZ podjęła niezbędne kroki, ale niezadowalający postęp w negocjacjach i zdecydowane działania zwaśnionych stron, skutecznie paraliżował siły ONZ, zwłaszcza do 1996 roku. Jeszcze trudniejsza była sytuacja w Bośni-Hercegowinie, którą zamieszkiwali bośniaccy muzułmanie, Serbowie i Chorwaci. Tu myśl niepodległościowa dojrzewała nieco wolniej, a konflikt między bośniackimi Serbami a bośniackimi muzułmanami i bośniackimi Chorwatami szybko narastał. W maju 1992 roku, w wyniku walk, większość obserwatorów ONZ musiała wycofać się do stref bezpieczeństwa w Chorwacji. Strony konfliktu wykazywały rosnącą agresję, nie przestrzegając rezolucji Rady Bezpieczeństwa ONZ. Działania ONZ w Bośni były zdecydowanie wsparte przez NATO z początkiem 1994 roku. Serbowie brali zakładników ONZ. Intensywne walki trwające do końca 1995 roku wykazały słabość ONZ-owskiego systemu bezpieczeństwa i pokoju. Korzystniej rozwijała się sytuacja w Macedonii i Kosowie, choć i tu ONZ zmuszona była rozmieścić "błękitne hełmy". 31 marca 1995 roku ustanowiono siły zapobiegawcze w Macedonii, a w Kosowie od 6 lipca 1998 roku działała międzynarodowa Dyplomatyczna Misja Obserwatorów, wspierana przez ONZ, OBWE, UE i NATO. Działania te wpłynęły na normowanie sytuacji na Bałkanach, choć w dalszym ciągu występuje niestabilność, zwłaszcza w Kosowie i Macedonii
Przedmiotem artykułu jest przedstawienie w zarysie zaangażowania polskiej policji w operacjach pokojowych na przykładzie misji prowadzonych w Afryce. Formą wprowadzenia do zasadniczej tematyki jest syntetyczne omówienie problematyki misji pokojowych, w którym zwrócono przede wszystkim uwagę na różnice między misjami prowadzonymi pod egidą ONZ oraz przez Unię Europejską. W dalszej części tekstu zaprezentowano obowiązujące w Polsce rozwiązania prawne dotyczące udziału policjantów w misjach zagranicznych. Zasadniczą część artykułu stanowi omówienie działalności dwóch polskich kontyngentów policyjnych uczestniczących w misjach na kontynencie afrykańskim (tj. Polskiego Kontyngentu Policyjnego Misji Pokojowej Obserwatorów ONZ w Republice Liberii UNMIL oraz Polskiego Kontyngentu Policyjnego Unii Europejskiej wspierającego misję Unii Afrykańskiej w Sudanie). W obu przypadkach przedstawiono również w syntetycznej formie tło konfl iktów, do których zażegnania wysłane zostały siły międzynarodowe. ; The purpose of the present article is to briefl y present the involvement of the Polish National Police in peacekeeping operations in Africa. The introductory part of the article focuses on the differences between UN and EU missions and includes a concise description of peacekeeping operations. Later in the article the author reviews Polish legislation on the involvement of police offi cers in international peacekeeping missions. The main part of the article describes two Polish contingents participating in peacekeeping operations in Africa, i.e. UNMIL Polish Police Contingent in Liberia and Polish Police Contingent in Sudan supporting EU operations in Sudan – AMIS II. In both the above named cases, the author has illustrates the background of armed confl icts and the quenching of which required the involvement of international forces. ; В статье рассмотрено участие польской полиции в миротворческих операциях на примере миссий, которые имели место в Африке. Введением к основной те- матике является синтетический осмотр проблематики миротворческих миссий, в котором, прежде всего, обращено внимание на разницу между операциями проводимыми под эгидой ООН и Европейского Союза. Далее автор описала существующее в Польше законодательство, касающееся участия полицейских в зарубежных миссиях. В основной части статьи рассмотрено деятельность двух польских контингентов полицейских, участвующих в операциях на Африкан- ском континенте (Польский полицейский контингент миротворческой миссии наблюдателей ООН в Республике Либерии [UNMIL] и Польский полицейский контингент Европейского Союза действующий в рамках миссии Африканского союза в Судане). В обоих случаях, в синтетической форме, указаны причины конфликтов, для прекращения которых были высланы международные силы.
Abstract: The European Union (EU) as well as other regional organizations, despite their own organizational and legal structures, model themselves on the United Nations in the field of peacekeeping operations and preventive diplomacy. In this regard, one should bear in mind the small achievements of the EU in the area of deploying its own peacekeeping forces and launching crisis response operations, including primarily military operations from scratch, due to the current state of military development and civilian operational capabilities. The global challenges of recent years have become more complex, multidimensional and fluid. The global EU strategy in the field of foreign and security policy presented in June 2016 underlines the strong link between the internal security of states and the internal security of the EU in the changing geopolitical conditions. It assumes that no country is able to face new threats on its own. Due to the fact that the interests of all EU Member States are inextricably linked, the EU creates conditions that allow Member States to cooperate more closely in defense when participating in peacekeeping operations. On the other hand, preventive diplomacy is currently one of the most effective ways of maintaining security in the international arena. The development of instruments used in EU preventive diplomacy, both military and non-military, is a response to changes in political-military relations between states. Nowadays, preventive diplomacy is an important measure in the context of activities undertaken within the EU security system and other international organizations, in order to prevent armed conflicts in all geographical regions. This article aims to analyze and present the essence of the analyzed means of maintaining peace and security in the activities undertaken by the EU in the 21st century. ; Streszczenie: Unia Europejska (UE), jak i inne organizacje regionalne, mimo własnych struktur organizacyjno-prawnych wzorują się na Organizacji Narodów Zjednoczonych w kwestii operacji pokojowych i dyplomacji prewencyjnej. W związku z tym należy mieć na uwadze niewielki dorobek UE w zakresie rozlokowania własnych sił pokojowych i rozpoczynania operacji reagowania kryzysowego, w tym przede wszystkim operacji militarnych od podstaw, ze względu na obecny stan rozwoju zarówno militarnych, jak i cywilnych zdolności operacyjnych. Globalne wyzwania ostatnich lat stały się bardziej złożone, wielowymiarowe i płynne. Przedstawiona w czerwcu 2016 r. Globalna Strategia UE w zakresie polityki zagranicznej i bezpieczeństwa podkreśla silny związek między bezpieczeństwem wewnętrznym państw a bezpieczeństwem wewnętrznym UE w zmieniających się warunkach geopolitycznych. Zakłada, iż żaden kraj nie jest w stanie samodzielnie stawić czoła nowym zagrożeniom. Ze względu na fakt, iż interesy wszystkich państw członkowskich UE są ze sobą nierozerwalnie związane, UE stwarza warunki, które umożliwiają państwom członkowskim ściślejszą współpracę w zakresie obrony, uczestnicząc w operacjach pokojowych. Z kolei dyplomacja prewencyjna stanowi obecnie jeden z najbardziej efektywnych sposobów utrzymania bezpieczeństwa na arenie międzynarodowej. Rozwój instrumentów wykorzystywanych w dyplomacji prewencyjnej UE, zarówno wojskowych, jak i pozawojskowych, jest reakcją na zmiany zachodzące w stosunkach polityczno-militarnych między państwami. Współcześnie dyplomacja prewencyjna jest istotnym środkiem, w kontekście działań podejmowanych w ramach systemu bezpieczeństwa UE i innych organizacji międzynarodowych, w celu zapobieżenia konfliktom zbrojnym we wszystkich regionach geograficznych. Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu przedstawienie istoty analizowanych środków utrzymania pokoju i bezpieczeństwa w działaniach przez UE w XXI wieku oraz ich analizę.
The article includes an analysis of the peace mission in Lebanon with the participation of the Polish Military Contingent. The organizational structure of the military health service securing our soldiers in that mission was also presented, bearing in mind the initial intended use of Polish units in this mission. The article is looking for an answer to the question about the importance of participation in peacekeeping missions of the Polish Armed Forces. It is also a description of the first mission in Lebanon, with a view to the re-participation of Polish troops in the mission at the end of 2019. Poland is considered a responsible member of NATO and the European Union. ; W pracy dokonano przeglądu misji pokojowej w Libanie z udziałem Polskiego Kontyngentu Wojskowego. Przedstawiono również strukturę organizacyjną wojskowej służby zdrowia zabezpieczającej żołnierzy we wspomnianej misji pamiętając o początkowym przeznaczeniu celowym polskich jednostek w tej misji. Autorka poszukuje odpowiedzi na pytanie o znaczenie udziału SZ RP w misji UNIFIL. Praca stanowi również próbę charakterystyki pierwszej misji w Libanie, w perspektywie ponownego udziału wojsk polskich w misji pod koniec 2019 roku. Polska uchodzi za odpowiedzialnego członka NATO i Unii Europejskiej.
The Role of India in the United Nations Organisation according to the Political Conception of Jawaharlal NehruIndia's accession to the international system which is the UN stemmed from the conviction that it is an organization that in the postwar world shaped international relations based on the principle of political and economic cooperation and safeguard the peace. India's membership in the United Nations gave opportunities for the dissemination of political ideology and beliefs regarding aspects such as anti–colonialism, disarmament, peacekeeping. This created the opportunity to play a significant role for India in world politics. Hence, since accession to the UN India very actively engaged in the work and activities for the organization. India offered their services to mediate between the parties to the conflict, working in support of the independence movement and for the avoidance of violence between states, also tried to mark their positions within the UN. The presence of India in the United Nations and the active involvement of the various field activities of this organization is not only an opportunity to indicate their role in the international arena and spread an ideology of non–alignment, but also the opportunity to speak in the interests of the Third World and to winning economic aid to post–colonial states.
The Role of India in the United Nations Organisation according to the Political Conception of Jawaharlal NehruIndia's accession to the international system which is the UN stemmed from the conviction that it is an organization that in the postwar world shaped international relations based on the principle of political and economic cooperation and safeguard the peace. India's membership in the United Nations gave opportunities for the dissemination of political ideology and beliefs regarding aspects such as anti–colonialism, disarmament, peacekeeping. This created the opportunity to play a significant role for India in world politics. Hence, since accession to the UN India very actively engaged in the work and activities for the organization. India offered their services to mediate between the parties to the conflict, working in support of the independence movement and for the avoidance of violence between states, also tried to mark their positions within the UN. The presence of India in the United Nations and the active involvement of the various field activities of this organization is not only an opportunity to indicate their role in the international arena and spread an ideology of non–alignment, but also the opportunity to speak in the interests of the Third World and to winning economic aid to post–colonial states.
Peacekeeping operations are nowadays an important phenomenon in international relations and especially in conflict-ridden regions. The concept and framework of such operations has been constantly evolving in the past and one of the milestones of this evolution was the fall of the communist system and the end of the cold war. In Europe, this historic moment coincided with establishment by the Maastricht Treaty of the new organism within the process of western Europe's integration: the European Union. Both these facts triggered a reaction of the somewhat passive and hardly visible European defence organisation of the Western European Union. Its Petersberg Declaration of 1992 redefined security and sought to change peace obligations of the member states of WEU, as they accepted a broader responsibility and a broader concept of security in the European region. This was an important first step in making defence integration a part of the mainstream integration process. On the legal basis of the Petersberg Declaration, six operations were carried out. The paper discusses them, showing striking similarities, which actually comprise a special philosophy of intervention by WEU. This philosophy reflects both strengths and weaknesses of WEU's role in the European integration.
Peacekeeping operations are nowadays an important phenomenon in international relations and especially in conflict-ridden regions. The concept and framework of such operations has been constantly evolving in the past and one of the milestones of this evolution was the fall of the communist system and the end of the cold war. In Europe, this historic moment coincided with establishment by the Maastricht Treaty of the new organism within the process of western Europe's integration: the European Union. Both these facts triggered a reaction of the somewhat passive and hardly visible European defence organisation of the Western European Union. Its Petersberg Declaration of 1992 redefined security and sought to change peace obligations of the member states of WEU, as they accepted a broader responsibility and a broader concept of security in the European region. This was an important first step in making defence integration a part of the mainstream integration process. On the legal basis of the Petersberg Declaration, six operations were carried out. The paper discusses them, showing striking similarities, which actually comprise a special philosophy of intervention by WEU. This philosophy reflects both strengths and weaknesses of WEU's role in the European integration.
This article examines the Upper Silesia plebiscite of 20 March 1921. The plebiscite was recognized by the Supreme Council of the Paris Peace Conference as the most effective instrument for appraising the local population's political preferences and their support for remaining in Germany or merging with Poland. Despite seemingly equal campaigning efforts and similar voter turnout, the proposed solution featured several limitations with more profound consequences for Poland. Only a part of Upper Silesia was covered by the plebiscite; the date of the plebiscite was announced less than a month before the event (both the local residents and the emigrants could vote); the German administration and representatives of the middle class (the bourgeoisie) and the upper class (aristocrats) exerted political pressure on local communities with Polish sentiments; the number of peacekeeping troops was insufficient to guarantee a fair Polish campaign and the emigrants' participation in the vote, including in the plebiscite area. Although their impact is difficult to determine, the above factors undoubtedly contributed to the absolute victory of German supporters. Despite the above, the proposed solution was not effective in dividing Upper Silesia into separate regions occupied by Polish and German communities.