title: Successes and Failures of United Nations Peace Operations
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Pushkina, Daria B.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2020-05-05T21:55:58Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2020-05-05T21:55:58Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2020-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Pushkina D. B. Successes and Failures of United Nations Peace Operations. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. History, 2020, vol. 65, iss. 1, рр. 261–277.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2020.115
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/17514
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: What does ‘success’ in peace operations mean? Is it purely the absence of hostilities or should
  it also be measured in terms of civilian suffering? Did a UN peacekeeping mission succeed
  because it fulfilled its mandate of monitoring elections or did it fail because it was not able to
  prevent civilian massacres in the areas where peacekeepers were deployed? Peace operations
  conducted by the United Nations remain under close scrutiny from both scholars and practitioners.
  This article examines the existing measures of UN’s effectiveness, proposes a new scale
  of measurement of successes and failures of UN PKO’s and examines 6 cases of UN PKO’s in
  Africa (UNTAG in Namibia, ONOMOZ in Mozambique, UNAMIR in Rwanda, UNOSOM
  in Somalia, MINURCA in Central African Republic, ONUB in Burundi) across proposed
  measures. The definition of success offered in this article (limiting violent conflict, reducing
  human suffering, preventing conflict from spreading, and preventing war from recurring)
  does two important things: 1) it acknowledges the different nuances, voices, and forces —
  international and domestic, societal and institutional — affecting whether a mission may or
  may not be considered successful; 2) it insists that the human dimension remains the primary
  criterion for such considerations. A more nuanced consideration of “success” and a close look
  at so many cases is relevant not only to conceptual debates about these issues but also to “real”
  policy in the past, present, and future. The article concludes that the suggested measures of
  success/failure lead to a more nuanced evaluation of UN’s performance.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. History;Volume 65; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: United Nations
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Peacekeeping Operations
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: International Security
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Intra-state conflicts
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: History of UN PKO’
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Successes and Failures of United Nations Peace Operations
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 261-277.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/17514/1/261-277.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 739,47 kB