| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article addresses the issue of the interaction between the UN and the concept of the use of force, arguing that the UN has, since its inception, suffered from the gap between the theoretical aspects of its mandate regarding the use of force and the reality of international politics. The first part looks at the dual nature of the UN, being the product of both a liberal and a realist approach to international relations, and the way that nature constrains the organization in using force. The second part illustrates the article's theme using the example of peace operations, which are at the heart of the conceptual ambiguity of the UN relationship with the use of force. In the early 1990s, the use of force within peace operations characterized the changing nature of such operations, as well as the gap between idealized peace-keeping and the reality of the field. Finally, the third part sheds light on the way the UN has dealt with recent developments regarding the use of force. Looking at the 'responsibility to protect' and at the Iraq case, it analyses the increasing difficulty for the UN of squaring the principles of its Charter with the evolutions of norms of interventions and threats to international and individual security.
|