Bourtros-Ghali, Boutros

English

Loyola Marymount University

Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law SchoolDigital Commons at Loyola MarymountUniversity and Loyola Law SchoolLoyola of Los Angeles International andComparative Law Review Law Reviews11-1-1993Maintaining International Peace and Security: TheUnited Nations as Forum and Focal Point—ASpeech by Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary-General of the United NationsBoutros Bourtros-GhaliThis Other is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola LawSchool. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized administrator ofDigital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@lmu.edu.Recommended CitationBoutros Bourtros-Ghali, Maintaining International Peace and Security: The United Nations as Forum and Focal Point—A Speech byBoutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary-General of the United Nations, 16 Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 1 (1993).Available at: http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ilr/vol16/iss1/1LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELESINTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVELAW JOURNALVOLUME 16 1993 NUMBER 1Maintaining International Peace andSecurity: The United Nations asForum and Focal PointBourRos BoutRos-GHALi*I. INMRODUCrIONEach international war in modem history has been followedby a "turning-point," at which nations convened to shape a newworld order. After the Napoleonic Wars, the Congress of Viennamet in 1815. After World War I, there was Versailles. After WorldWar II, the United Nations ("U.N.") was created at San Francisco.When the Cold War ended, a system of international relationsalso departed. Thereafter, when troubles arose, individual statesturned to the U.N. for guidance, as it was a foundation already inplace.At this point in time, we have reached another such turning-point in world history. Yet, no new international gathering hascome in the wake of the Cold War; no Vienna, no Versailles, andno new San Francisco is to be expected. The U.N. as it exists mayserve as the only forum.These diplomatic rooms in which we are meeting honor Frank-lin, Jefferson, Madison, and Adams, great names among America'sFounders. The constitution they produced remains alive. It is asolid document, able to stand up to the storms of history. But it isalso a flexible document, able to respond to the winds of change.* Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali is the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Thisspeech was given to the American Publishers Association on March 25, 1993, in Washing-ton, D.C.Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J.The Charter of the United Nations is also a document of ge-nius. It can hold fast to principle, yet it can also adapt to new con-ditions. The spirit of the Charter was kept alive for decades undervery difficult circumstances. Hope has been crucial. Achievementis now required. There are strengths we can build upon, but thereare also changes we must contemplate.Democracy is not a word that appears in the Charter. Yet, theopening words, "We the Peoples of the United Nations," build de-mocratization into the World Organization. Whether or not itsMember States are democracies themselves, they are joined in astructure of equal representation. Democratization is the threadwhich runs through all the work of the Organization. Within na-tions, as much as within the family of nations, democracy shouldprovide the structure for international peace and security.Human rights, equal rights, and government under law are im-portant attributes of democracy. With participation, social andeconomic development becomes meaningful; with freedom ofspeech and of thought, civil institutions become durable. Individ-ual involvement in the political process enhances the accountabilityand responsiveness of governments. In turn, governments that areresponsive and accountable are likely to be stable and to promotepeace.Promotion of peace and security, economic and social devel-opment, and democracy are one and the same. The ending of theCold War has ended the compartmentalization of issues. It has re-vealed the indivisibility of the tasks of the U.N.Today, I intend to focus on peace-keeping. In doing so, I muststress that this is only one aspect of the work of the U.N. Seventyto eighty percent of U.N. activities are focused elsewhere. But to-day, U.N. peace-keeping operations are of urgent interest and con-cern. The Organization established to promote collective securityhas now become the world's most active peace-keeper. The news-papers are filled with unexpected, dangerous, and difficult situa-tions for U.N. forces. Threatening confli6ts are underway in manyparts of the globe.When the U.N. was created, the Charter gave responsibilityfor international peace and security to the Security Council. Butthe Cold War impaired the Council's function. Individual stateseverywhere learned to calculate their interests and seek security inthe context of the bipolar contest.[Vol. 16:11993] Maintaining International Peace and SecurityFaced with this reality, the U.N. invented a role for itself:peace-keeping. This had not been contemplated by the Charterdrafted in 1945. Peace-keeping had to be "invented" by theU.N.-and the genius of the Charter could accommodate it. Overthe years, it came to have a fairly specific meaning.Traditional U.N. peace-keeping required the consent of allparties to a conflict. Troops provided by Member States of theU.N. served under the command of the Secretary-General. Theforces were lightly armed. Their mission was to interpose them-selves between parties who had decided to halt their fighting,agreeing on the need for an international presence to keep thepeace. Peace-keepers could use their weapons only in self-defense.Confrontation was to be avoided if at all possible. It was not partof the peace-keepers' mandate to become involved in the internalaffairs of the individual states or entities involved.Currently, what the world has known as "peace-keeping" haschanged. The reality on the ground is evolving out of the concep-tual structures of the past. We are witnessing the emergence of thesecond generation of peace-keeping, and far more is required thaninterposition with the agreement of parties to a cease-fire.In discussing this new generation of peace-keeping, I wouldlike to discuss three changes: the changing facts which peace-keep-ing now confronts; the changing structure of our response; and thechanges that are needed in our concepts.II. DIscussIoNA. The Changing FactsThere is an immense quantitative change with the facts sur-rounding U.N. peace-keeping. The U.N. has launched more peace-keeping operations in the last four years than it did in the firstforty-three. Currently, the U.N. is involved in thirteen peace-keep-ing operations on five continents. Over 53,000 authorized militarypersonnel are serving at this moment under U.N. command, alongwith over 10,000 international and local civil personnel. Because ofthis increase in involvement, the operations approved at presentwill have cost over three billion dollars in 1992, more than fourtimes the previous highest annual figure.There is also a quantitative change in the number of phasesthat an operation may have to go through. For years, the troops ofthe United Nations Force in Cyprus ("UNFICYP") have patrolledLoy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J.the line which separates the antagonistic forces without fundamen-tal change. A new operation today, however, is likely to gothrough a number of different phases in order to adapt to changingcircumstances on the ground. Between erecting barriers against vi-olence and building bridges of rehabilitation lies a great variety ofchanging situations to be faced.New military facts must also be faced. U.N. operations todaymay require disarming or seizing weapons from factional fighters,with or without an agreement. The arms must be kept in custodyand possibly destroyed. Before, during, and after conflict, the seri-ous problem of land mines must be dealt with. Additionally, hu-manitarian aid now may require military protection. The oldassumption that those bringing relief will be allowed to do theirgood work unharmed can no longer be taken for granted.Non-military matters have also become of great importance inpeace-keeping. It is almost always the modem case that operationsundertaken by the U.N. must include civilian police, electoral per-sonnel, human rights experts, information specialists, and a signifi-cant number of political advisory staff.We also face a new fact of international life: the failed state.This is a concept which the Charter did not foresee; indeed, thefailed state is a product of the end of the Cold War. Regimes areproving unable to cope with the withdrawal of superpower support,weak institutions, collapsing economies, natural disasters, and eth-nic strife.Rescuing failed states may become an inherent part of second-generation peace-keeping. It will require long, complex, and costlymissions which, by their very nature, involve the U.N. in the inter-nal affairs of the country concerned. Complicated military tasksmust be complemented by measures to strengthen institutions, en-courage political participation, protect human rights, and promoteeconomic and social development.B. The Changing StructureThese changes have created a new set of circumstances thatcall for a rapid response and comprehensive effort. This meansthat we must reform the structure of our approach.A good example of this is the problem of standby troops. Ifthe availability of troops is to be guaranteed in the necessary time-frame, Member States must either assign them permanently to the[Vol. 16:1Maintaining International Peace and SecurityU.N. or formally agree with the U.N. to make troops availablewithin an agreed response time. The first option is not yet avail-able; the second option may be possible if reforms are undertaken.It is difficult to forecast the troop requirements for future mis-sions or for sudden expansions of existing missions. On the otherhand, there is a wealth of data available from past missions, andmany common features emerge. It is possible to describe a rangeof scenarios of varying complexity, each generating the need for aforce structure of a particular size and capability. These forcestructures can be broken down into standard "building blocks" ofoperational capability, such as infantry batallion, medical company,transport company, observer team, etc. Each new mission require-ment could be elaborated in terms of these standard buildingblocks.The overall objective would be for Member States to formallycommit themselves to provide one or more of such blocks. Thiswould simplify the Member State's national planning; it couldbudget for such a commitment in its defense estimates, or it couldkeep a nominated group on standby. From the military point ofview, such standby units could be briefed and trained in the U.N.peace-keeping operations as part of their normal annual trainingcycle; thus, they would be better prepared than units made avail-able on an ad hoc basis.The need to be comprehensive will require wider cooperationwith regional organizations. In a number of recent cases, the U.N.has combined its efforts with those of regional institutions or orga-nizations and has encouraged a rich variety of complementary ef-forts with regional organizations. In the former Yugoslavia, forexample, the U.N. works with the European Community; inSomalia, with the Organization for African Unity; in Haiti, with theOrganization of American States. There are many such examples.No two regions or situations are the same. The design of coopera-tive work must adapt to the facts of each case with flexibility andcreativity.My aim is to see that cooperation between the world Organi-zation and regional organizations evolves into an increasingly ef-fective division of labor. While the U.N. retains its primacy in themaintenance of international peace and security, its burden can besubstantially lightened and its mission reinforced by the active in-volvement of appropriate regional arrangements and agencies.19931Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J.C. The Changing ConceptsFinally, let me address the concepts that must be understoodand accepted if U.N. peace-keeping is to be transformed to dealsuccessfully with changing realities.First, the concept of preventive diplomacy is of vast impor-tance. This requires personal contacts, good offices, fact-findingmissions, and early warning systems. None of the concepts I haveput forward in the past year has met with such a warm response aspreventive diplomacy. No other endeavor for peace repays so wellour time, effort, and investment.But today, the concept of preventive diplomacy needs to beexpanded. It may require, for example, observers as a means ofdealing with violence. In recent months, U.N. observers haveworked in close cooperation with the National Peace Secretariat inSouth Africa to reduce tensions, contain demonstrations, and stopclashes from getting out of control.Further, within this expanding concept of preventive diplo-macy has come the Security Council's decision in December 1992authorizing me to establish a presence of the U.N. Protective Forcein the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia., This act of pre-ventive deployment was taken to preempt a wider Balkan war. Itis the first time that the U.N. has taken a step of this kind, and it isan example of the growing range of actions that preventive diplo-macy will need to encompass in the future.Second is the concept of expanded peace-keeping. The protec-tion of humanitarian relief supplies is a new necessity for peace-keeping in a growing number of conflicts around the world. Thisneed was most dramatically evident in recent months in Somalia.In the former Yugoslavia, U.N. forces were authorized to securethe Sarajevo airport and related lines of communication in orderthat vital humanitarian assistance be able to flow to the beseigedpopulation.2Expanded peace-keeping also may .require sanctions whencease-fire agreements are violated. In such cases, the U.N. mayneed to authorize military measures to enforce economic sanctions.The "no-fly zone" is one example. Another Resolution is in effectin Cambodia, where the Security Council has imposed petroleum1. S.C. Res. 795, U.N. Doc. SIRES795 (1992).2. S.C. Res. 764, U.N. Doc. S/RES764 (1992).[Vol. 16:1Maintaining International Peace and Securitysanctions against "any Cambodian party not complying with [theParis] Agreements" for cease-fire, disarmament, and nationalreconciliation.3Additionally, when the established rules of engagement forpeace-keeping operations are no longer sufficient, U.N. forces mayneed authorization to react to force and, in some cases, use force toforestall an escalation in violence.As circumstances warrant, U.N. forces must be thought of dif-ferently and be expected to have a different profile. They must beable to deploy rapidly; they must have more firepower; and theymust be able to draw upon a far wider range of personnel. Also,they must have adequate financial support.The third new concept is post-conflict peace-building. This in-volves sustained efforts to identify and support structures to con-solidate peace and to create greater trust and well-being amongpeoples. Without such efforts, no peace agreement is likely to en-dure for long. Such measures require commercial, cultural, and ed-ucational projects that build bridges between the parties to aconflict. The goal is to forestall a reemergence of cultural and na-tional tensions that could spark renewed hostilities.The concept of peace-building is the counterpart of preventivediplomacy, which seeks to avoid the breakdown of peaceful condi-tions. After peace-making, peace-enforcement, and peace-keepingachieve results, post-conflict peace-building must prevent a recur-rence of hostilities.In this second generation of peace-keeping, every operationwill be different. Somalia is a good example. First, the SecurityCouncil, pursuant to Resolution 794 of December 3, 1992, author-ized me and certain Member States to establish a secure environ-ment for humanitarian relief operations in the country. This was toallow the United Nations Operations in Somalia ("UNOSOM") tofulfill its mandate. We accomplished this by creating the UnifiedCommand ("UNITAF"), with the United States as the major par-ticipant. UNITAF has, to some extent, restored order and pro-vided for the distribution of food to the Somali people.In my report to the Security Council of March 3, 1993, I ex-pressed the view that the second stage of the operation must nowinvolve a new mandate for United Nations Operations in Somalia3. S.C. Res. 792, U.N. Doc. S/RES792 (1992).19931Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J.("UNOSOM II"). UNOSOM II would encompass not only contin-ued disarmament and pacification, but also national reconciliation,dialogue, and the strengthening of political institutions.My special representative, Admiral Jonathan Howe, has begunwork in Somalia and at the Conference on National Reconciliationheld in Addis Ababa. All these efforts are directed towards onecentral goal: to help the people of Somalia establish order and newinstitutions for their own governance.III. CONCLUSIONSomalia shows second-generation peace-keeping in action. Italso underscores the challenge ahead. We must find new ways-intellectually, morally, and materially-to speak to the deeperfoundations of international peace and security. These are rootedin the development of each of its aspects: economic, social, polit-ical, and environmental. Today, I have focused on peace-keeping,but the greater context should be understood. Unless we advancethe development of the planet economically, socially, environmen-tally, and democratically, we will not break the cycle of conflict wesee everywhere today.There are three basic challenges to the international commu-nity: (1) to understand the nature of the new, post-Cold War role ofthe U.N.; (2) to make the commitment of human and financial re-sources necessary for the U.N. to do its job; and (3) to give clearand comprehensive mandates to the Organization when new chal-lenges arise.This is a time to be bold. But it is not a time to be utopian.The margin by which the U.N. can affect critical situations is nar-row. At the same time, we do not have the luxury of lowering oursights. We live in a globalized world. There are needs which onlythe U.N. can meet.The U.N. is the forum for the world system that we must build.The Charter recognized the issues and set out a system to addressthem. Our task, therefore, is to use our Charter to answer the is-sues of our time. Within the context of a great tradition, and with awillingness for change, we can build a better and safer world.[Vol. 16:1

Maintaining International Peace and Security: The United Nations as Forum and Focal Point—A Speech by Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary-General of the United Nations

https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1313&amp;context=ilr

Maintaining International Peace and Security: The United Nations as Forum and Focal Point—A Speech by Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary-General of the United Nations

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Loyola Marymount University