UPSC Exam  >  UPSC Notes  >  UPSC Mains: World History  >  How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization

How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization | UPSC Mains: World History PDF Download

How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization?


Although it has had mixed success, it is probably fair to say that the UN has been more successful than the League in its peacekeeping efforts , especially in crises which did not directly involve the interests of the great powers, such as the civil war in the Congo ( 1960-4) and the dispute between the Netherlands and Indonesia over West New Guinea.
On the other hand, it has often been just as ineffective as the League in situations - such as the Hungarian rising of 1956 and the 1968 Czech crisis - where the interests of one of the great powers - in this case the USSR - seemed to be threatened, and where the great power decided to ignore or defy the UN. The best way to illustrate the UN’ s varying degrees of success is to examine some of the major disputes in which it has been involved.

West New Guinea (1946)

In 1946 the UN helped to arrange independence from Holland for the Dutch East Indies, which became Indonesia (see Map 24.3). However, no agreement was reached about the future of West New Guinea (West Irian ), which was claimed by both countries. In 1961 fighting broke out; after U Thant had appealed to both sides to reopen negotiations, it was agreed ( 1962) that the territory should become part of Indonesia. The transfer was organized and policed by a UN force. In this case the UN played a vital role in getting negotiations off the ground, though it did not itself make the decision about West Irian’ s future.

Palestine (1947)


The dispute between Jews and Arabs in Palestine was brought before the UN in 1947.

After an investigation, the UN decided to divide Palestine, setting up the Jewish state of Israel (see Section 11.2). This was one of the UN’s most controversial decisions, and it was not accepted by the majority of Arabs. The UN was unable to prevent a series of wars between Israel and various Arab states ( 1948-9, 1967 and 1973), though it did useful work arranging ceasefires and providing supervisory forces, while the UN Relief and Works Agency cared for the Arab refugees.

The Korean War (1950-3)

  • This was the only occasion on which the UN was able to take decisive action in a crisis directly involving the interests of one of the superpowers. When South Korea was invaded by communist North Korea in June 1950, the Security Council immediately passed a resolution condemning North Korea, and called on member states to send help to the South.
  • However, this was possible only because of the temporary absence of the Russian dele ¬ gates, who would have vetoed the resolution if they had not been boycotting Security Council meetings (since January of that year) in protest at the failure to allow communist China to join the UN . Although the Russian delegates returned smartly, it was too late for them to prevent action going ahead. Troops of 16 countries were able to repel the invasion and preserve the frontier between the two Koreas along the 38th parallel.
  • Though this was claimed by the West as a great UN success, it was in fact very much an American operation - the vast majority of troops and the Commander-in -Chief , General MacArthur, were American, and the US government had already decided to intervene with force the day before the Security Council decision was taken. Only the absence of the Russians enabled the USA to turn it into a UN operation. This was a situation not likely to be repeated, since the USSR would take good care to be present at all future Council sessions.
  • The Korean War had important results for the future of the UN', one was the passing of the ‘Uniting for Peace’ resolution, which would permit a Security Council veto to be bypassed by a General Assembly vote. Another was the launching of a bitter attack by the Russians on Secretary-General Trygve Lie for what they considered to be his biased role in the crisis. His position soon became impossible and he eventually agreed to retire early , to be replaced by Dag Hammarskjold.

The Suez Crisis (1956)

  • This arguably showed the UN at its best. When President Nasser of Egypt suddenly nationalized the Suez Canal, many of whose shares were owned by the British and French, both these powers protested strongly and sent troops ‘to protect their interests’. At the same time the Israelis invaded Egypt from the east; the real aim of all three states was to bring down President Nasser. A Security Council resolution condemning force was vetoed by Britain and France, whereupon the General Assembly, by a majority of 64 votes to 5, condemned the invasions and called for a withdrawal of troops. In view of the weight of opinion against them, the aggressors agreed to withdraw, provided the UN ensured a reasonable settlement over the canal and kept the Arabs and Israelis from slaughtering each other. 
  • A UN force of 5000, made up of troops from ten different countries, moved in, while the British, French and Israelis went home. The prestige of the UN and of Dag Hammarskjold, who handled the operation with considerable skill, was greatly enhanced, though American and Russian pressure was also important in bringing about a ceasefire. However, the UN was not so successful in the 1967 Arab-Israeli conflict.

The Hungarian Rising (1956)

  • This took place at the same time as the Suez Crisis, and showed the UN at its most ineffective. When the Hungarians tried to exert their independence from Russian control, Soviet troops entered Hungary to crush the revolt. The Hungarian government appealed to the UN, but the Russians vetoed a Security Council resolution calling for a withdrawal of their forces. The General Assembly passed the same resolution and set up a committee to investigate the problem ; but the Russians refused to co-operate with the committee and no progress could be made. The contrast with Suez was striking: there, Britain and France were willing to bow to international pressure; the Russians simply ignored the UN, and nothing could be done.

Civil war in the Congo (1960-4)

Here the UN mounted its most complex operation to date (see Section 25.5), except for Korea. When the Congo (known as Zaire since 1971) dissolved into chaos immediately after gaining independence, a UN force numbering over 20 000 at its largest managed to restore some sort of precarious order. A special UN Congo Fund was set up to help with the recovery and development of the ravaged country. But the financial cost was so high that the UN was brought close to bankruptcy, especially when the USSR, France and Belgium refused to pay their contributions towards the cost of the operations, because they disapproved of the way the UN had handled the situation. The war also cost the life of Dag Hammarskjold, who was killed in a plane crash in the Congo.

Cyprus

  • Cyprus has kept the UN busy since 1964. A British colony since 1878, the island was granted independence in 1960. In 1963 civil war broke out between the Greeks, who made up about 80 per cent of the population, and the Turks. A UN peacekeeping force arrived in March 1964; an uneasy peace was restored, but it needed 3000 UN troops permanently stationed in Cyprus to prevent Greeks and Turks tearing each other apart. That was not the end of the trouble, though: in 1974 the Greek Cypriots tried to unite the island with Greece.
  • This prompted the Turkish Cypriots, helped by invading Turkish army troops, to seize the north of the island for their own territory . They went on to expel all Greeks who were unfortunate enough to be living in that area. The UN condemned the invasion but was unable to remove the Turks. UN forces did at least achieve a ceasefire and are still policing the frontier between Greeks and Turks. However, the UN has still not been successful in finding an acceptable constitution or any other compromise. The most recent attempt -the Annan Plan of 2004 - was accepted by the Turks but rejected by the Greeks.

Kashmir

  • In Kashmir the UN found itself in a similar situation to the one in Cyprus. After 1947, this large province, lying between India and Pakistan ( see Map 24.1 ) was claimed by both states. Already in 1948 the UN had negotiated a ceasefire after fighting broke out. At this point the Indians were occupying the southern part of Kashmir, the Pakistanis the northern part, and for the next 16 years the UN policed the ceasefire line between the two zones.
  • When Pakistani troops invaded the Indian zone in 1965, a short war developed, but once again the UN successfully intervened and hostilities ceased. The original dispute still remained, however, and in 1999 there were violent clashes as Pakistanis again unsuccess¬ fully invaded the Indian zone. There seemed little prospect of the UN or any other agency finding a permanent solution.

The Czechoslovak crisis (1968)

This was almost a repeat performance of the Hungarian rising 12 years earlier. When the Czechs showed what Moscow considered to be too much independence, Russian and other Warsaw Pact troops were sent in to enforce obedience to the USSR . The Security Council tried to pass a motion condemning this action, but the Russians vetoed it, claiming that the Czech government had asked for their intervention. Although the Czechs denied this, there was nothing the UN could do in view of the USSR’ s refusal to co-operate.

The Lebanon

  • While civil war was raging in the Lebanon (1975-87) matters were further complicated by a frontier dispute in the south of the country between Lebanese Christians (aided by the Israelis) and Palestinians. In March 1978 the Israelis invaded South Lebanon in order to destroy Palestinian guerrilla bases from which attacks were being made on northern Israel. In June 1978 the Israelis agreed to withdraw, provided the UN assumed responsibility for policing the frontier area. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), consisting of about 7000 troops, was sent to South Lebanon. It supervised the Israeli with drawal and had some success in maintaining relative peace in the area; but it was a constant struggle against frontier violations, assassinations, terrorism and the seizing of hostages.
  • During the early 1990s a new enemy began to harass Israel from bases in South Lebanon: this was the Muslim Shi’ ite group known as Hezbollah, which, according to the Israeli government, was backed by Iran and Syria. In retaliation the Israelis launched a major attack on South Lebanon ( April 1996) and occupied most of the region until 1999 . Once again UNIFIL helped to supervise an Israeli withdrawal and the force was increased to around 8000. In 2002, as the region seemed calmer than for many years, UNIFIL was reduced to some 3000. UNIFIL worked hard to strengthen the Lebanese army, providing training and equipment. Eventually the two forces were able to work together to maintain stability , though a permanent solution still seemed far off . In July 2006 Hezbollah ambushed an Israeli patrol; eight Israeli soldiers were killed and two taken prisoner. The Israelis responded immediately: demanding the return of the captured soldiers, they blockaded Lebanon from the sea, bombed Beirut and destroyed Hezbollah’ s headquarters. Hezbollah retaliated by firing rockets into Israel at a rate of over a hundred a day . It was mid-August before the UN succeeded in arranging a cease fire. UNIFIL was increased to 12 000 and there was relative calm for the next four years. Early in 2011 violent incidents began again . The Israelis were still refusing to move out of a small area around the village of Gharjah , north of the withdrawal line agreed in 2006.
  • There were several exchanges of fire between the Lebanese army and the Israeli Defence Force, terrorist attacks on UNIFIL itself and the firing of rockets into Israel. 

The Iran-lraq War (1980-8)

The UN was successful in bringing an end to the long -drawn-out war between Iran and Iraq. After years of attempting to mediate, the UN at last negotiated a ceasefire, though admittedly they were helped by the fact that both sides were close to exhaustion.

The document How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization | UPSC Mains: World History is a part of the UPSC Course UPSC Mains: World History.
All you need of UPSC at this link: UPSC
50 videos|67 docs|30 tests

Top Courses for UPSC

50 videos|67 docs|30 tests
Download as PDF
Explore Courses for UPSC exam

Top Courses for UPSC

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Related Searches

shortcuts and tricks

,

pdf

,

MCQs

,

study material

,

video lectures

,

How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization | UPSC Mains: World History

,

mock tests for examination

,

Extra Questions

,

How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization | UPSC Mains: World History

,

Free

,

Summary

,

Objective type Questions

,

Exam

,

How Successful Has The UN Been As a Peacekeeping Organization | UPSC Mains: World History

,

past year papers

,

Important questions

,

Previous Year Questions with Solutions

,

practice quizzes

,

Sample Paper

,

Viva Questions

,

Semester Notes

,

ppt

;