Two decades later, those responsible for peacekeeping — UN officials, countries on the security council assigning missions, militaries contributing the forces in blue helmets — say the lessons of the s have been learned. Protection of civilian lives is now a priority. UN soldiers no longer have their hands tied in using force to defend the innocent. Perhaps most important, the failures of two decades ago stripped the UN of the illusion that an election and a few soldiers in blue helmets is enough to sustain peace.
The politics of the UN security council continues to hamstring action over some conflicts, such as Syria and Darfur. Other missions drag on indefinitely, such as in the DRC and Haiti.
There is friction between the UN and some governments over who has ultimate command over peacekeeping troops, which has resulted in conflicting orders with disastrous consequences. Then there are spreading conflicts against armed Islamist groups in central and west Africa.
This is preventative diplomacy. If we can prevent at the time of symptoms of a crisis, we can save a lot of human lives and human resources. The troops coming were generally from countries that had the means to launch expeditions. The UN is also grappling with persistent accusations of rape and sexual exploitation by its peacekeepers, which is further undermining confidence in the organisation, particularly in some of the countries where its soldiers are deployed.
And there are added demands as the US presses for peacekeepers to take on a more aggressive role, particularly against armed Islamist groups in Africa. President Barack Obama is jointly hosting a summit with Ban in New York later this month to seek commitments to strengthen peacekeeping with better trained troops, equipment and intelligence resources, to the alarm of some of the countries that provide substantial contingents of troops in blue helmets.
India, which has sent more soldiers on UN missions than any other country — , on 49 missions — is openly challenging the move towards what some see as mostly rich and powerful countries on the security council sending the poor to fight and die. They are not supposed to be partisan. If somebody wants soldiers to go in and fight they should hire mercenaries, not take UN soldiers. UN peacekeeping came into its own with the collapse of the Soviet Union in and the diminishing of ideological rivalries that had dominated international politics since the second world war.
Early successes in Cambodia, Namibia, Mozambique and El Salvador generated an overconfidence in the ability of UN soldiers to keep the peace. Each of those countries had an accord that former warring parties wanted to maintain. The UN learned the hard way in Angola, Rwanda and Bosnia that where the UN wants peace more than those in conflict, then the illusion of peacekeeping can perpetuate instability and cost lives.
No longer would UN forces stand idly by while innocent people were murdered. More than , UN peacekeepers have served in Haiti since and close to , been deployed to the DRC over the past 15 years. There is little prospect of either mission ending soon. The emphasis on Africa is in part a reflection of the enduring nature of some conflicts on the continent, but also the politics of the security council.
The UN might have had large peacekeeping missions in Syria and Ukraine, were it not for Russian objections. As the scale of peacekeeping has grown so have the questions about its role.
When Habyarimana's plane was shot down at the beginning of April , it was the final nail in the coffin. Exactly who killed the president - and with him the president of Burundi and many chief members of staff - has not been established. Whoever was behind the killing its effect was both instantaneous and catastrophic. In Kigali, the presidential guard immediately initiated a campaign of retribution.
Leaders of the political opposition were murdered, and almost immediately, the slaughter of Tutsis and moderate Hutus began. Within hours, recruits were dispatched all over the country to carry out a wave of slaughter.
The early organisers included military officials, politicians and businessmen, but soon many others joined in the mayhem. Organised gangs of government soldiers and militias hacked their way through the Tutsi population with machetes, or blew them up in churches where they had taken refuge. The extremist ethnic Hutu regime in office in appeared genuinely to believe that the only way it could hang on to power was by wiping out the ethnic Tutsis completely. Encouraged by the presidential guard and radio propaganda, an unofficial militia group called the Interahamwe meaning those who attack together was mobilised.
At its peak, this group was 30,strong. Soldiers and police officers encouraged ordinary citizens to take part. In some cases, Hutu civilians were forced to murder their Tutsi neighbours by military personnel. Participants were often given incentives, such as money or food, and some were even told they could appropriate the land of the Tutsis they killed. Additionally, two World Bank-funded projects including the Rural Sector Support Program, and the Land Husbandry, Water Harvesting and Hillside Irrigation Project have increased the productivity and commercialization of rural agriculture.
As a result, maize and rice yields doubled and potato yields tripled between and These results are especially promising considering poverty in Rwanda is the most severe in rural areas. Rwanda has also achieved a strong level of political stability.
These are indicators that will increase confidence in foreign investors. While Rwanda has a troubled history, the future holds a lot of potential. Blog - Latest News. The issue of the failure of the international community in preventing the Rwandan genocide is a difficult topic to write about, and I hope hat you will support me in my challenging aim to raise awareness. Before I head into a simplified version of the complexities of international interventions or lack of in the Rwandan genocide, I would just like to say that this is a brief summary that combines what I learned while travelling in Rwanda, with my extended reading.
It is a summary of articles and apparent facts rather than my opinion and whilst writing this, I would like to acknowledge that we may never know the full truth about international intervention during the Rwandan genocide, and that there is always more to learn. I hope that you will support me in my challenging aim to raise awareness. It is important to remember how rapidly the Rwandan genocide occurred — an estimated 1 million people macheted to death amongst other ways of killing in just days.
The main focus of the European community was on Yugoslavia.
0コメント