By polarizing the world, the Cold War extinguished the hope of cooperation and peace which the United Nations had represented at the end of World War II. When the Cold War ended, the UN was given a new lease on life. Many saw it as the guarantor of a New World Order.
Following this vision, the UN bravely expanded the objectives and physical size of its peacekeeping operations. In Bosnia, the UN has attempted peacemaking--a euphemism for trying to force peace upon unwilling parties. In Somalia the UN went further; it tried to build a state out of a shattered nation.
Recently, these lofty dreams have come crashing down. The UN operations in Bosnia and Somalia have failed. There has been no peace agreement in Bosnia, and many of the peacekeepers in Somalia have fled, leaving the political scene almost as unstable as when they came.
In Rwanda, the UN has faltered again. This time, though, the UN has failed not because it tried to do too much but because it has done too little, too late.
When the French forces pulled out of Rwanda last Sunday, the UN did not have a sufficient replacement force to take control over the "safe zone" that the French had established over the southwestern part of the country. To fill the vacuum, the new Tutsi-dominated Rwandan government which is controlled by the Rwanda Patriotic Front, the victor in the recent civil war, has stated that it would move its soldiers into this "safe zone." Fearing ethnic violence, many Hutus have tried to flee to Zaire.
This new exodus will greatly increase the loss of life that was already occurring in the overextended refugee camps in Zaire. These camps are bulging with almost two million refugees of the recent civil war. If the UN had quickly organized a replacement for the French forces, much of this suffering would have been avoided.
However, the UN bureaucracy and the secretary-general, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, should not be blamed for this debacle. This responsibility must fall on the west, and the United States in particular. Several African nations have donated troops (a small contingent from Ghana has already been deployed), but wealthy countries have been slow to offer the money, equipment, and logistical support essential to the success of any complex multinational mission.
Since the UN can ultimately do no more than its member countries are willing to do, the UN's success is dependent on the commitment of its members. The United States, as the only superpower, must take the lead in fully supporting the UN. Without America's financial muscle, UN operations will remain underfunded. Without America's diplomatic commitment, the UN will be increasingly ignored.
This is not to say that the UN is flawless. The UN must avoid future Somalias, Bosnias, and Rwandas. The UN should concentrate its energies on improving its humanitarian assistance and traditional peacekeeping (i.e. where all, or in some cases most, sides have agreed to a UN presence) operations and eschew peacemaking and state-building. Whether peacemaking or state-building may be laudable goals for the future or not, at present, they have proven to be impractical and ineffectual.
Peacemaking and state-building also hinder the success of other, more effective operations because they take money, equipment, and attention away from these projects. Because of the limits on UN resources imposed by its member countries, sending peacekeepers to one trouble-spot means that they cannot be sent to another.
Furthermore, the all-too frequent failure of these operations discourages countries' involvement in the UN and decreases its legitimacy. The failure in Somalia, for example, has made many countries wary of supporting other UN missions like Rwanda.
Some may ask why should the United States support the UN anyway? What has the United States to gain by committing to the UN? The answer is that the UN, for all its flaws, does save lives, and America has a moral responsibility to help the UN do this better. Moreover, the UN, as a representation of the world community, remains the best vehicle for promoting stability, democracy, and the rule of international law throughout the world.
The New World Order was not a mirage; it is a goal for the future, and the UN is a key component toward the realization of this goal.
