United Nations peace operations: applicable norms and the application of the law of armed conflict

Air Force Law Review, Wntr, 2001 by Joseph P. Bialke

Because of the very recent development of robust Chapter VI 1/2 peacekeeping operations, as well as their inherent complexities, the UN has yet to create consistent and workable rules regarding the use of force in such operations. Although it has formulated workable guidelines as to the use of Force in self-defense in classical Chapter VI 1/2 peacekeeping operations, there is little agreement as to how the laws of armed conflict apply during robust Chapter VI 1/2 operations. [109]

C. United Nations Charter Chapter VII Peace-Enforcement Operations

Chapter VII of the UN Charter is entitled "Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression." [110] A Chapter VII peace-enforcement action is not a peacekeeping mission. Yet, just as the UN Charter does not mention peacekeeping , neither does it mention the term "peace-enforcement." Even so, essentially any Chapter VII operation is one of creating and them maintaining peace. As the UN cannot be expected to mount a peacekeeping operation when there is no peace to be kept, Chapter VII envisages that the UN will, in certain circumstances, affirmatively enforce and make peace.

Peace-enforcement is distinct from peacekeeping as it usually involves the use of force against a nation-state, whereas classical peacekeeping limits the use of force to self-defense. [111] Yet, to date, the UN has never conducted, nor authorized, a "pure" peace-enforcement action. Rather, in the form of "neopeace-enforcement," [112] the UN has only "invited" or "requested" its Member States to take offensive military action on its behalf. Further, it has only authorized four such "neopeace-enforcement" operations. [113] It is Article 43 of the UN Charter [114] that was envisaged to be the primary instrument of the UN Security Council in peace-enforcement. The goal was creation of a standing UN military force to be used to secure and maintain international peace. Due to Member State political differences, this force has yet to come into being. [115]

As there are no military forces at the Security Council's direct disposal, its Military Staff Committee has no forces to direct in a "pure" peace-enforcement action. Instead, the Security Council occasionally has authorized Member States to conduct Chapter VII "neopeace-enforcement actions" [116] on behalf of the UN. The two most notable of these include the 1950 Korea neopeace-enforcement action and the 1991 neopeace-enforcement action against Iraq. In both cases, although it was the UN that authorized offensive military action, the operations were not under the command of the UN. [117] Further, in both cases, the forces authorized by the UN were "belligerent forces in an international armed conflict," and therefore, under existing international law, the personnel who served in these armed forces were lawful targets. [118] For the purposes of this article, however, peace-enforcement actions refer to both "pure" peace-enforcement and "neopeace-enforcement" actions.