Un Efforts At Violent Conflict Prevention

1826 WordsApr 18, 20168 Pages
At first glance, UN efforts at violent conflict prevention do not look promising. Every time a dispute escalates to major armed conflict in the world, the failures of the UN at violent conflict prevention become evident. It can be true that the UN leaves much to be desired as a conflict preventer but at the same time also be true that the UN is providing added value when it does devote resources to prevent conflicts. Disputes over self-determination involve state governments and some ethnic group seeking increased control over some territory in the state, which can include greater cultural, economic, or political autonomy up to a demand for secession in order to form an independent state or to unite with another state. Since the 1990s, self-determination disputes have been the most common cause of civil war, yet these disputes can exist independent of and prior to—or after—violent conflict. Accordingly, we treat these disputes as a set ofpotential civil wars and ask if they are less likely to escalate to civil war after the adoption of UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions that pertain to them. Specifically, we examine whether various types of resolutions adopted by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)—including condemnations, diplomatic measures, and authorizations of sanctions and force—affect the likelihood that these disputes become civil wars. We find that UNSC resolutions can have a substantial preventive effect, through both directly engaging the disputing
Open Document