Advertisement

U.N. Peacekeepers Can Do More : Successes Show Ability to Tackle Other Hot Spots, Wider Roles

Share
<i> Cyrus Vance, a member of the Palme Commission, was secretary of state in the Carter Administration. Barry Blechman helped to draft the commission's report. He is a former assistant director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. </i>

In the broad sweep of international events, no development has been more important in the last two years than the considerable progress that has been made in resolving conflicts in the developing world. This is the conclusion of the Palme Commission, a group of 16 former heads of state, cabinet-level ministers and political leaders, chaired by Sweden’s late Prime Minister Olof Palme, which met sporadically between 1980 and April of this year.

At its final meeting, the commission noted that as late as 1986, there were 36 armed conflicts around the globe, virtually all in developing regions. Because these wars occurred primarily in areas already debilitated by poverty and underdevelopment, the human suffering was extraordinary. An estimated 3 million to 5 million people died as a direct result of war; millions more have fled the fighting, seeking food, shelter, health care and escape from political persecution. Indeed, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees is aiding 13 million people at present, an appalling figure and an odious index of the world’s continuing inhumanity.

Within the last two years, progress has been made toward the relief of this suffering. U.N. mediators have made possible a cease-fire in the Iran-Iraq war, although not yet a peace settlement. They have also brought an end to the use of Soviet forces in Afghanistan, although not to the civil war in that country. U.S. mediation has led to the conclusion of agreements that could help to advance the cause of peace in Namibia and Angola. Other efforts by the United Nations and by regional leaders to mediate conflicts have met with varying degrees of success in Central America, the Western Sahara and Cambodia.

Advertisement

U.N. forces will play a role in ensuring the peace in many of these situations, as they do already in the Middle East and several other regions. There are 10,000 soldiers from 23 countries now serving in the “blue-helmet” force. They carry out two kinds of operations: U.N. peacekeepers impose themselves between contending forces to avert incidents that could flare into war, while unarmed U.N. observers monitor, report and mediate between local commanders in the field. At present, there are eight operations of each type under way, and the prospect of several more in the near future.

The development of a more stable and peaceful international system requires greater attention to U.N. peacekeeping. Changes in U.N. procedures--particularly a strengthening of the secretary-general’s authority to monitor, report on and recommend actions concerning international conflicts--could enable peacekeeping missions to be mounted in a more timely manner and carried out more effectively. Moreover, both the roles envisioned for these international military forces, and the resources available for them, could usefully be expanded.

Traditionally, U.N. peacekeepers have been used to oversee cease-fires and other temporary means of ending armed conflicts. In the more peaceful climate that now exists, more wide-ranging functions can be envisioned:

--U.N. forces could be used to oversee elections in situations such as Namibia’s.

--Maritime peacekeeping forces could be established to ensure free passage through vital international waterways, like the Strait of Hormuz, in situations such as the recent hostilities in the Persian Gulf, and to maintain security in waters troubled by pirates, as in Southeast Asia.

--In certain other types of situations, U.N. peacekeeping forces could be used to respond to international terrorists, as well as to protect mini-states from mercenaries and other external threats to their security.

--U.N. experts and logistical capabilities could even be used to help contain the effects of ecological catastrophes that threaten neighboring states, particularly in nations that lack the resources or expertise to deal with such problems alone.

Advertisement

Such an expansion of peacekeeping functions could not take place unless greater resources were made available to the U.N. organization. Indeed, resources limitations have already curbed peacekeeping operations. Because of fiscal constraints, for example, the size of the U.N. Transition Assistance Group in Namibia was reduced by nearly half and its start delayed. It does not require imagination to understand that problems currently threatening the peace arrangements in southern Africa are related to this ragged start.

Military units in national armed forces, including the armed forces of the permanent members of the Security Council, that might be made available for peacekeeping should be earmarked now, before they are needed, along with the air- and sea-lift units that could move them to trouble spots in a timely fashion. Specialized equipment should be stockpiled, particularly seismic and acoustic sensors, communications gear and mobile radars, all of which could be helpful in monitoring disengagement zones. Industrialized nations might help developing states to train and equip their military forces for peacekeeping.

Financing peacekeeping operations has always been a problem, with various states at times refusing to pay their assessed contributions. At its last meeting, the Palme Commission proposed that a special peacekeeping fund be established and built up to a total of $2 billion over a few years. The fund would be financed on the basis of a general formula assessing U.N. members, with no one member expected to pay an excessive share. Voluntary contributions to the peacekeeping fund also would be encouraged, particularly from those states like Japan and West Germany that, as a matter of law or policy, do not participate directly in peacekeeping operations.

The world is in the midst of a warming trend in international relations. Not only have East-West relations improved greatly, but there is at least diplomatic movement in virtually all troubled regions. Such trends come and go, however. The nations of the world must act now to take the concrete steps necessary to preserve and expand the progress which has recently been achieved.

Advertisement