scholarly journals Attacks on United Nations Peacekeeping Forces: A Violation of International Humanitarian Law

1970 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 19-37
Author(s):  
Bolaños Tania Gicela
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Paper Briefly ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Peacekeeping Forces ◽  
United Nations Peacekeeping

This paper raises the question as to whether the United Nations peacekeeping forces could be awarded a civilian status during the armed conflict in which they are deployed; which is important for the determination of prohibition of attacks against them. The paper is based on the premise that distinction between civilians and combatants is crucial under international humanitarian law. In doing so, this paper briefly analyses the nature of UN peacekeeping operations and the qualification of the UN forces’ members as civilians or combatants. It also delves into the emerging category of UN robust peacekeeping operations to ascertain whether its personnel would be treated as civilians or combatants in the context of an international armed conflict.

Perspective on the applicability and application of international humanitarian law: the UN context

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (891-892) ◽  
pp. 645-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarina Grenfell
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Peacekeeping Forces ◽  
The Right

The applicability of international humanitarian law (IHL) to United Nations (UN) forces has long generated discussion. When peacekeepers have become engaged in hostilities of such a nature as to trigger the application of IHL (either via acts in self-defence, or in the course of carrying out a mandate as authorised by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations), questions have arisen as to whether they should be equally subject to the rules of IHL. Such questions arise as UN peacekeeping forces act on behalf of the international community and thus have a ‘just cause’, so to speak, to use force. Despite these questions, however, it now appears well settled that the distinction between jus ad bellum (the right to use force under public international law) and jus in bello (the law governing the conduct of hostilities) should be maintained, and that IHL applies in respect of UN peacekeeping operations whenever the conditions for its application are met. That said, questions regarding the conditions for the application of IHL, as well as its scope of application, continue to be relevant, particularly at a time when the Security Council is tasking UN operations with increasingly robust mandates.

Intervention Brigades in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and Challenges Posed to International Humanitarian Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Verda Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Democratic Republic Of Congo ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Rebel Groups ◽  
Peace And Conflict Studies ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Alternative Approach

In recent decades, the United Nations (UN) has directed its peacekeeping operations to be practice-driven. This has led to an alternative approach to state-military contacts, such as those provided by the United States and other nations; the UN is more inclined to consolidate and strengthen its liaisons through Intervention Brigades. The efficacy of these brigades lies in providing military assistance to UN operations and catering to logistics, training, and advice. Advocates of peace, the UN peacekeeping operations (UNPKOs) are based on consent, impartiality, and non-utilization of force (excluding times of civilian protection and self-defense). However, as Intervention Brigades gain momentum, 'robust' peacekeeping is becoming more regulated; thus, promoting 'force' against rebel groups and/or militias. When aligned with robust Intervention Brigades, which utilizes more force than lawfully permitted, UN peacekeeping (UNPK) missions question these operations' credibility, thus blurring the conceptual difference between peacekeeping and peacebuilding. Conspicuously, this exploits the traditional principle of impartiality using hard power and violates the International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Exemplifying through the case study of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), this paper aims to discuss the abovementioned discrepancy resulting in complications for the discipline of Peace and Conflict Studies (PCS). As the discipline promotes achieving peace through „soft‟ means, the paper reviews the subject under Chapter VI & VII of the UN charter and highlights the grey areas of IHL applicability in UN peacekeeping and Intervention Brigades.

UN Peacekeeping Operations: Applicability of International Humanitarian Law and Responsibility for Operations-Related Damage

2000 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 406-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daphna Shraga
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
First Time

In the five decades that followed the Korea operation, where for the first time the United Nations commander agreed, at the request of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to abide by the humanitarian provisions of the Geneva Conventions, few UN operations lent themselves to the applicability of international humanitarian law

The Application of International Humanitarian Law to Peacekeepers

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 190-222
Author(s):  
Thierry Kaiser ◽  
Carlijn Ruers
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Hostile Environment ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
The Status

Abstract Peacekeepers deployed as part of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (minusma) are operating in an increasingly hostile environment, requiring them to use force regularly in order to defend civilians, themselves and, more generally, minusma’s mandate. Over the last few years, minusma’s mandate has been expanded to enable the Mission to address the growing threat posed by hostile armed groups, including terrorist armed groups, and to provide support to counter-terrorist forces. The frequent hostilities, coupled with the Mission’s enhanced “robust” mandate and the rising number of demands made on minusma by non-UN forces for operational and logistical support, have raised questions concerning the status and legal protection of minusma’s peacekeepers under international humanitarian law, and more broadly the adequacy of the legal framework applicable to modern UN peacekeeping operations deployed in a “no peace to keep” environment. This article argues that a clarification of the application of the legal framework is required in order to afford better protection to Mission personnel and to more accurately capture the situation on the ground.

The United Nations as a Party to Armed Conflict

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 313-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damian Lilly
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Republic Of The Congo ◽  
The United Nations

As the role of United Nations peacekeeping operations has evolved in recent decades so too has the legal interpretation of the way in which international humanitarian law (ihl) is viewed as applying to its peacekeepers. While it has been understood that the un could become a party to armed conflict, the organization has never publicly acknowledged this until the establishment of the Intervention Brigade of the of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (monusco) pursuant to Security Council resolution 2098 of March 2013. This article addresses the legal consequences of the Intervention Brigade as a party to armed conflict and the insights it provides into the legal status of un peacekeeper under ihl. In particular, it will argue that the established legal framework for un peacekeeping operations as having the protected status of civilians under ihl has proved ill-suited for the Intervention Brigade and its experience has highlighted the inconsistencies and gaps in the rules that have been developed.

scholarly journals The Significance of Pre-Deployment Training, Culture Tolerance and Impartiality in Reducing Conflicts during Peacekeeping Operations: Malaysian Experiences

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. p9
Author(s):  
Nordin, N. N. H. ◽  
Husin, W. N. W. ◽  
Salleh, M. Z.
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Cultural Understanding ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Peacekeeping Forces ◽  
United Nations Peacekeeping ◽  
High Level

Cultural understanding is important in peacekeeping operations since it emphasizes on cooperation of various parties including the cooperation of the local community. Without cultural tolerance from both sides, this operation are difficult to run smoothly and effectively and in fact, this can also lead to a worsen situation, such as the armed conflict between the peacekeeping forces and the local community. Therefore, this study is carried out by using semi-structured interview of 25 officers who have been assigned under United Nations peacekeeping operations and it is centered on three parameters namely pre-deployment training, high level of tolerance and impartiality in discharging their duties. Most officers agree that these parameters are the most significant attributes that could reduce cultural based conflict in the assigned areas.

International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 33 (293) ◽  
pp. 94-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Doswald-Beck ◽  
Sylvain Vité
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
The United Nations

International humanitarian law is increasingly perceived as part of human rights law applicable in armed conflict. This trend can be traced back to the United Nations Human Rights Conference held in Tehran in 1968 which not only encouraged the development of humanitarian law itself, but also marked the beginning of a growing use by the United Nations of humanitarian law during its examination of the human rights situation in certain countries or during its thematic studies. The greater awareness of the relevance of humanitarian law to the protection of people in armed conflict, coupled with the increasing use of human rights law in international affairs, means that both these areas of law now have a much greater international profile and are regularly being used together in the work of both international and non-governmental organizations.

Applying Additional Protocol II of the Geneva Conventions to the United Nations Forces

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 234-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artem Sergeev
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Hostile Environments

Following the widespread participation of United Nations (UN) forces in hostile environments, this article aims to expand the obligations of the UN under International Humanitarian Law. The article argues that Additional Protocol II (AP II) to the Geneva Conventions can bind UN forces, even though the UN is not formally a party thereto. The argument is built on three distinct legal issues: the first issue is whether the UN’s involvement in a conflict internationalizes a non-international armed conflict; the second issue is the legal nature of the UN’s obligations under AP II, which will be explained through two legal theories of indirect consent; and the third issue is the conformity of UN forces to the criteria of an armed group outlined in AP II. The article concludes that if UN forces meet certain conditions, as will be outlined herein, they should be bound by the provisions contained in AP II.

scholarly journals Importance of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) Training in Armed Police Force, Nepal

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-119
Author(s):  
Narendra Bam ◽  
Raju Shrestha ◽  
Ram Krishna Maharjan
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Police Force ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Struggle ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions ◽  
External Intervention

International humanitarian law (IHL) applies at times of armed conflict, placing legal obligations on all warring parties that are designed to limit the inhumanity of warfare. Armed Police Force (APF), Nepal with the mandate to control an armed struggle occurred or likely to occur in any part of Nepal, to control armed rebellion or separatist activities or likely to occur in any part of Nepal, and to provide assistance in case of external intervention being under the Nepali Army, can at any time become a party in both international and non-international armed conflict. APF’s role in UN Peacekeeping Missions is also an area where it may have to engage with non-state actors if and when situation demands. All these necessitate APF personnel to have proper understanding and compliance to the principles of IHL, violation of which can increase human suffering and consequent individual criminal responsibility and command responsibility. In light of this, it concludes the IHL specific trainings in APF, Nepal should be maintained and augmented to ensure broad and better understanding and respect for IHL in times of conflict.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document