The PEP Spotlight

Introducing a new PEP site section...

A recent addition to the PEP website is a section entitled "Monthly Reports", giving interested parties a monthly "snapshot" of events occuring in the Central African Republic, Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, and Sudan. Any Security Council action or updates are included as well. To access this page, simply scroll down and select the "Monthly reports" link under Information Center, or click here.
Posted on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 10:30AM by Registered CommenterPEP Coordinator | CommentsPost a Comment

Washington Post editorial on Burma

In Burma, a U.N. Promise Not Kept

by Fred Hiatt, May 12, 2008

When a parent abuses or neglects a child, government steps in to offer protection. But who steps in when government abuses or neglects its people?

Nearly three years ago, the United Nations announced an answer to that question: It would. At a summit celebrating the organization's 60th birthday, 171 nations agreed that they would intervene, forcefully if necessary, if a state failed to protect its own people. The action was seen as both a sign of remorse for the failure to stop genocide in Rwanda and a rebuke to the United States and its unilateral ways.

"I'm delighted that the responsibility to protect, a Canadian idea, now belongs to the world," said Canada's prime minister at the time, Paul Martin. "The United Nations will not find itself turning away or averting its gaze."

Since then the United Nations has averted its gaze as Sudan's government continues to ravage the people of Darfur. It has turned away as Zimbabwe's rulers terrorize their own people. Now it is bowing to Burma's sovereignty as that nation's junta allows more than a million victims of Cyclone Nargis to face starvation, dehydration, cholera and other miseries rather than allow outsiders to offer aid on the scale that's needed.

In light of America's troubles in Iraq, the pendulum in the United States has swung toward multilateral solutions and international law. All three candidates to replace President Bush have promised to restore alliances and put more faith in allies.

But the stalemate in Burma, also known as Myanmar, shows how difficult it is to translate "responsibility to protect" into action. It's hard to imagine a government more deserving of losing the national equivalent of its parental rights; yet it seems more likely that hundreds of thousands of people will die needlessly than that the United Nations will act.

Read full article...

Posted on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 at 11:50AM by Registered CommenterPEP Coordinator | CommentsPost a Comment

Can we apply R2P to Burma?

Facing up to our responsibilities
Given the Burmese regime's inflexibility so far, there may be a case under international law for forcing it to accept disaster relief
Gareth Evans

May 12, 2008

If the intransigence of the Burmese generals continues, we will have to face the question of whether in the name of humanity some international action should be taken against their will - like military air drops, or supplies being landed from ships - to get aid to the huge numbers who desperately need it, right now, in the inaccessible coastal area in particular.

Last Thursday, Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, argued, as others are now doing, that this is a proper case for coercive intervention under the "responsibility to protect" principle unanimously endorsed by 150 heads of state and government at the 2005 UN world summit. His proposal that the security council pass a resolution which "authorises the delivery and imposes this on the Burmese government" met with immediate rejection not only from China and Russia, who are always sensitive about intervention in internal affairs, but from many other quarters as well.

It generated concern from the UK and others, including senior UN officials, that such an "incendiary" approach would be wholly counterproductive in winning any still-possible cooperation from the generals. It also provoked the argument from humanitarian relief agencies - who know what they are talking about - that simply as a practical matter any effort to drop supplies without an effective supporting relief on the ground would be hopelessly inefficient, and maybe even dangerous, with the prospect of misuse of medical supplies.

These are strong arguments, and they weigh heavily in the policy balance. But as the days go by, with relief efforts impossibly hindered, only a trickle of the government's own aid getting through, and the prospect of an enormously greater death toll looming acutely within just a few more days, they are sounding less compelling, and at the very least, need revisiting.

My own initial concern, and it remains a serious one, with Kouchner's invocation of the "responsibility to protect" was that, while wholly understandable as a political rallying cry - and God knows the world needs them in these situations - it had the potential to dramatically undercut international support for another great cause, to which he among others is also passionately committed, that of ending mass atrocity crimes once and for all.

The point about "the responsibility to protect" as it was originally conceived, and eventually embraced at the world summit - as I well know, as one of the original architects of the doctrine, having co-chaired the international commission that gave birth to it - is that it is not about human security generally, or protecting people from the impact of natural disasters, or the ravages of HIV-Aids or anything of that kind.

Read the full commentary...
Posted on Monday, May 12, 2008 at 10:41AM by Registered CommenterPEP Coordinator | CommentsPost a Comment

UN Peacekeeping Salon

From April 21-28 2008, Mark Malan, the Peacebuilding Program Officer for Refugees International and Executive Coordinator for the PEP, participated in an online UN peacekeeping salon that facilitated dialogue regarding a paper written by William Durch of the Stimson Center that discussed the peacekeeping challenges awaiting the upcoming administration in 2009. The online discussion, hosted by UN Dispatch and Foreign Policy Passport, featured a total of five participants and two moderators.

To read the discussion blogs and learn more about past salons sponsored by UN Dispatch, follow the link below:

 

http://www.undispatch.com/archives/peacekeeping_salon/

Posted on Tuesday, April 29, 2008 at 11:19AM by Registered CommenterPEP Coordinator | Comments1 Comment

UN DPKO "Capstone Doctrine" document complete...

9 April, 2008

United Nations Peacekeeping Operations:
Principles and Guidelines

A key priority for DPKO/DFS in the past year has been the development of an overarching guidance document, UN Peacekeeping Operations: Principles and Guidelines, that aims to provide practitioners and partners with a comprehensive overview of the principles and concepts guiding the planning and conduct of contemporary UN peacekeeping operations. To develop this landmark document, DPKO engaged in a wide consultative process involving a series of “expert-level”, regional workshops, which brought together representatives of the major troop and police contributors, donor countries, UN staff and leading academics. Consultations were also held with Member States and UN system partners in New York to ensure that their views and concerns were fully taken into account. The document constitutes the first attempt in over a decade to clarify the nature and scope of UN peacekeeping operations for the benefit of peacekeeping practitioners and partners. It should be considered a living document that will need to be updated and reviewed to reflect the evolution of UN peacekeeping operations.


"Over the past six decades, United Nations peacekeeping has evolved into a complex, global undertaking. During this time, the conduct of United Nations peacekeeping operations has been guided by a largely unwritten body of principles and informed by the experiences of the many thousands of men and women who have served in the more than 60 operations launched since 1948. This document captures these experiences for the benefit and guidance of planners and practitioners of United Nations peacekeeping operations."
Posted on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 10:45AM by Registered CommenterPEP Coordinator | CommentsPost a Comment
Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next 5 Entries