UN Governance: Peace and Human

Security in Cambodia and Timor-Leste

1st ed. Edition Brendan M. Howe
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/un-governance-peace-and-human-security-in-cambo
dia-and-timor-leste-1st-ed-edition-brendan-m-howe/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Rethinking Human Rights and Peace in Post-Independence

Timor-Leste Through Local Perspectives Ying Hooi Khoo

https://ebookmass.com/product/rethinking-human-rights-and-peace-
in-post-independence-timor-leste-through-local-perspectives-ying-
hooi-khoo/

National Security, Statecentricity, and Governance in

East Asia Howe

https://ebookmass.com/product/national-security-statecentricity-
and-governance-in-east-asia-howe/

The Invisibility Bargain: Governance Networks and

Migrant Human Security 1st Edition Jeffrey D. Pugh

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-invisibility-bargain-
governance-networks-and-migrant-human-security-1st-edition-
jeffrey-d-pugh/

Transitional (in)Justice and Enforcing the Peace on

Palestine Brendan Ciarán Browne

https://ebookmass.com/product/transitional-injustice-and-
enforcing-the-peace-on-palestine-brendan-ciaran-browne/
The Governance, Security and Development Nexus: Africa
Rising 1st ed. Edition Kenneth Omeje

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-governance-security-and-
development-nexus-africa-rising-1st-ed-edition-kenneth-omeje/

Preventive Diplomacy, Security, and Human Rights in

West Africa 1st ed. Edition Okon Akiba

https://ebookmass.com/product/preventive-diplomacy-security-and-
human-rights-in-west-africa-1st-ed-edition-okon-akiba/

Cambodia and the West, 1500-2000 1st ed. Edition T. O.

Smith

https://ebookmass.com/product/cambodia-and-the-
west-1500-2000-1st-ed-edition-t-o-smith/

The UN at War: Peace Operations in a New Era 1st

Edition John Karlsrud (Auth.)

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-un-at-war-peace-operations-in-
a-new-era-1st-edition-john-karlsrud-auth/

Challenging the United Nations Peace and Security

Agenda in Africa Nagar

https://ebookmass.com/product/challenging-the-united-nations-
peace-and-security-agenda-in-africa-nagar/
SECURITY, DEVELOPMENT AND
HUMAN RIGHTS IN EAST ASIA

UN Governance
Peace and Human Security in
Cambodia and Timor-Leste

Brendan M. Howe · Sorpong Peou ·

Yuji Uesugi
Security, Development and Human
Rights in East Asia

Series Editor
Brendan M. Howe
Graduate School of International Studies
Ewha Womans University, GSIS
Seoul, Korea (Republic of)
This series focuses on the indissoluble links uniting security, development
and human rights as the three pillars of the UN, and the foundation of
global governance. It takes into account how rising Asia has dramati-
cally impacted the three pillars at the national, international and global
levels of governance, but redirects attention, in this most Westphalian of
regions, to human-centered considerations. Projects submitted for inclu-
sion in the series should therefore address the nexus or intersection of
two or more of the pillars at the level of national or international gover-
nance, but with a focus on vulnerable individuals and groups. The series
targets postgraduate students, lecturers, researchers and practitioners of
development studies, international relations, Asian studies, human rights
and international organizations.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14488
Brendan M. Howe · Sorpong Peou ·
Yuji Uesugi

UN Governance
Peace and Human Security in Cambodia
and Timor-Leste
Brendan M. Howe Sorpong Peou
Graduate School of International Department of Politics and Public
Studies Administration
Ewha Womans University, GSIS Ryerson University
Seoul, Korea (Republic of) Toronto, ON, Canada

Yuji Uesugi
Faculty of International Research and
Education
Waseda University
Tokyo, Japan

Security, Development and Human Rights in East Asia

ISBN 978-3-030-54571-0 ISBN 978-3-030-54572-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54572-7

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for
general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa-
tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither
the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Contents

1 Global Governance Principles and UN Implementation 1

2 A Critical Reflection on UNTAC’s Contributions

to Human Security in Cambodia 33

3 Post-UNTAC UN Peacebuilding and Human Security

in Cambodia 57

4 A Critical Reflection on the UN Mission’s

Contributions to Human Security in Timor-Leste 83

5 Post-UNMIT Peacebuilding and Human Security

in Timor-Leste 111

6 Legacies and Futures 135

Index 151

v
 About the Authors

Brendan M. Howe is Professor of International Relations at the Grad-

uate School of International Studies, Ewha Womans University, where he
has worked since 2001. He researches on traditional and non-traditional
security policymaking in East Asia; peacebuilding; human security; demo-
cratic governance; middle power diplomacy; and post-crisis development.

Sorpong Peou is Professor of Global Peace and Security in the Depart-

ment of Politics and Public Administration, Ryerson University, Toronto,
Canada. His fields of expertise and research interest include global gover-
nance, especially in the area of global peace and security, regional security
in the Asia-Pacific, and democratisation in East Asia. He was a survivor of
the Khmer Rouge killing fields and lost many of his family members.

Yuji Uesugi is Professor of Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding at

the School of International Liberal Studies and the Graduate School of
International Culture and Communication Studies, Waseda University,
Tokyo, Japan. His fields of expertise and research interest include hybrid
peacebuilding in Asia, UN peace operations, security sector reform, and
regional security in the Asia-Pacific.

vii
 Abbreviations

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations

AusAID Australian Aid
BCTL Banco Central de Timor-Leste
BPA Banking Payment Authority
C34 Special Committee on Peacekeeping
CAAC Commission for Matters of Former Combatants (Comissão para
os Assuntos dos Antigos Combatentes)
CAQR Commission for Matters of Cadres of the Resistance (Comissão
para os Assuntos dos Quadros da Resistencia)
CAVF Commission for Matters of Veterans of Falintil (Comissão para
os Assuntos dos Veteranos das FALINTIL)
CAVR Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East
Timor (Comissão de Acolhimento, Verdade e Reconciliação de
Timor Leste)
CCN National Consultation Council (Conselho Consultivo Nacional)
CGDK Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea
CGG Commission on Global Governance
CHS Commission on Human Security
CN National Council (Conselho Nacional)
CNRM National Council of Maubere Resistance (Conselho Nacional
da Resistência Maubere)
CNRP Cambodian National Rescue Party
CNRT National Council for Timorese Resistance (Conselho Nacional
da Resistência Timorense)
CPP Cambodian People’s Party
DPKO Department of Peacekeeping Operations

ix
x ABBREVIATIONS

DWCP Decent Work Country Programme

EBA Everything But Arms
ECCC Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia
ECOSOC Economic and Social Council
ETTA East Timorese Transitional Administration
EU European Union
FALINTIL Armed Forces for the National Liberation of East Timor (Forças
Armadas de Liberatação National de Timor-Leste)
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FDI Foreign Direct Investment
F-FDTL FALINTIL-Defence Forces of Timor-Leste (Forças Defesa de
Timor-Leste)
FIB Force Intervention Brigade
FRETILIN Revolutionary Front of Independent East Timor (Frente
Revolucionaria de Timor-Leste Independente)
FUNCINPEC National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful,
and Cooperative Cambodia
GNI Gross National Income
GNR National Republican Guard (Guarda Nacional Republicana)
HDI Human Development Index
HSU Human Security Unit
IAB Investment Advisory Board
ICC International Criminal Court
ICISS International Commission on Intervention and State
Sovereignty
ICJ International Court of Justice
ICTR International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
ICTY International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
IDP Internally Displaced Person
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
ILO International Labour Organization
IMF International Monetary Fund
INTERFET International Force East Timor
ISF International Stabilisation Force
JIM Jakarta Informal Meeting
KPNLF Khmer National Liberation Front
LoCALL Local Climate Adaption Living Program
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MOFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs
MSS Ministry of Social Solidarity
NIC Newly industrialized countries
NRS National Recovery Strategy
ODA Official Development Assistance
 ABBREVIATIONS xi

OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights

P5 Five Permanent Members
PF Petroleum Fund
PKO Peacekeeping Operations
PMC Private Military Companies
PNTL National Police of Timor-Leste (Policia Nacional de Timor-
Leste)
POC Protection of Civilians
POLRI Indonesian National Police (Kepolisian Negara Republik
Indonesia)
PPAs Pairs Peace Agreements
PRK People’s Republic of Kampuchea
R2P Responsibility to Protect
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SMEs Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
SNC Supreme National Council
SOC State of Cambodia
SOFA Status of Forces Agreements
SOMA Status of Missions Agreements
SPSC Special Panels for Serious Crimes
SRSG Special Representative of the Secretary-General
SSR Security Sector Reform
TAC Treaty of Amity and Cooperation
TNI Indonesian National Armed Forces (Tentara Nasional
Indonesia)
TSDA Timor Sea Designated Authority
UN United Nations
UNAIDS United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
UNAKRT United Nations Assistance of the Khmer Rouge Trials
UNAMET United Nations Mission in East Timor
UNAMIC United Nations Advance Mission in Cambodia
UNCDF United Nations Capital Development Fund
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organiza-
tion
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNGA United Nations General Assembly
UNHRC United Nations Human Rights Council
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization
UNMISET United Nations Mission of Support in East Timor
UNMIT United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste
xii ABBREVIATIONS

UNOHCFR United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human

Rights
UNOTIL United Nations Office in Timor-Leste
UNPKO United Nations Peacekeeping Operations
UNRC UN Resident Coordinator
UNSC United Nations Security Council
UNSCR United Nations Security Council Resolution
UNSG United Nations Secretary-General
UNTAC United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia
UNTAET United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor
UNTFHS United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security
US United States
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USSC United States Supreme Court
WFP World Food Program
WHO World Health Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
 CHAPTER 1

Global Governance Principles and UN

Implementation

Abstract This chapter explores the theoretical framework of global

governance and UN implementation of related principles through the
mediums of peacekeeping and peacebuilding operations. Measurements
of the success of such operations introduced in this chapter include
legality, legitimacy, and efficacy/effectiveness. Legality is presented from
the perspective of both ‘positive’ international law, and the prescrip-
tions of customary law. Legitimacy is examined in terms of international
recognition, local ownership, and human-centred good governance. Effi-
cacy is defined with regard to the stated goals of UN operations and
how well they provide for the human security of all, but especially the
most vulnerable. East Asian perspectives and conditions are also counter-
posed to the universal aspirations of the UN and liberal peacekeeping and
peacebuilding. It concludes with a chapter overview.

Keywords United Nations (UN) · Governance · Legality · Legitimacy ·

Efficacy · Human security

© The Author(s) 2021 1

B. M. Howe et al., UN Governance, Security, Development
and Human Rights in East Asia,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54572-7_1
2 B. M. HOWE ET AL.

Introduction
This volume evaluates the performance of the United Nations (UN)
in ensuring good governance from a human-centred perspective, in
Cambodia and Timor-Leste (formerly East Timor), the two most impor-
tant and comprehensive cases of peacekeeping and peacebuilding. Both
cases are situated in the Southeast Asian subregion of East Asia (which
also includes Northeast Asia), and East Asian perspectives and condi-
tions are counterposed to the universal aspirations of the UN and
liberal peacekeeping and peacebuilding. The legality, legitimacy, and effi-
cacy/effectiveness of UN operations in the two countries are considered.
These three categories are, however, interrelated rather than exclusionary,
reflecting the complex nature of contemporary governance prescription.
Legality is presented from the perspective of both codified ‘positive’
international law, and the supplementary prescriptions of the “customs
and usages of civilized nations of states” (United States Supreme Court
[USSC] 1900), the “general principles of law recognized by civilized
nations” (ICJ 1945, Article 38(c)), and “the teachings of the most highly
qualified publicists of the various nations” (ICJ 1945, Article 38(d)).
Legitimacy is examined in terms of international recognition, local owner-
ship, and human-centred good governance (Howe 2012). Efficacy is
assessed with regard to the stated goals of UN peacekeeping and state-
building missions in general and these two case studies in particular. As
the stated goals increasingly reflect human-centred governance compo-
nents, how well these UN missions provided for the human security of
all, but especially the most vulnerable, can also be considered in terms of
measurements of efficiency.
The case studies will be assessed at three ‘moments’: the justifiability of
intervening (peacekeeping/peacebuilding/responsibility to protect (R2P)
authorisations); the justifiability of actions and policies implemented
during the intervention (responsibilities while protecting and keeping
the peace); and the justifiability of the situation after the interventions
took place and UN forces were withdrawn (governance responsibilities
after protection or after the initial construction of safe havens/building
enduring and sustainable peace).
We expect those who govern to do so in the interests of the governed,
usefully providing services that can best or perhaps only be achieved
through collective action. According to the Report of the Commission
 1 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND UN IMPLEMENTATION 3

on Global Governance, “governance is the sum of the many ways indi-

viduals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs”
(CGG 1995, p. 2). It is an ongoing and evolutionary process which looks
to reconcile conflicting interests in order to protect the weak, through
the rule of law, from unjust exploitation, and introduce security for all.
Governance is also a process through which collective good and goods
are generated so that all are better off than they would be acting indi-
vidually. Thus, governance implies a concern by those who govern with
both the security and development, or provision of basic human needs,
of those who are governed (Howe 2012, p. 346). This includes steps to
eradicate poverty, particularly in conflict-affected areas, where insecurity
and underdevelopment provide twin, mutually reinforcing threats to lives
and livelihoods. ‘Safe havens’ can therefore be seen as those geograph-
ically bounded areas existing at either the state or substate level, where
those who govern prioritise the interests of the most vulnerable of those
governed, ensuring that they live free from fear and want to the greatest
degree possible (ibid.).
Domestically, governance is carried out primarily by instruments of the
state—that is to say the government and related institutions. Internation-
ally, governance implies not only global attempts to govern in the absence
of world government, dealing with international conflicts of interests and
those issues which transcend national boundaries, but also a concern with
what can be done by international actors when domestic governance
fails to provide safe havens. Peace and security have long constituted
the central objectives of global governance and form an essential dimen-
sion of human well-being. Indeed, peace and security feature heavily in
the preamble to the UN Charter and their maintenance is listed as the
first purpose of the UN, the major manifestation of the global gover-
nance mission. Increasingly, however, the global governance agenda has
evolved to include consideration of peace within states rather than exclu-
sively focusing on the generation of peace between them. In doing so
there has been movement from championing the interests and rights of
states, towards championing those of vulnerable individuals and groups.
Consequently, the new human-centred concerns of good global gover-
nance place the paradigm as much within the contemporary development
agenda, as it was formerly within the peace and political stability agenda.
Chiefly, at the level of academic discourse, as well as increasingly in the
policy sphere, this humanising of measurements of governance success
reflects what has come to be known as ‘human security’. Prescriptions
4 B. M. HOWE ET AL.

made under the dictates of this concept reflect both normative concerns
(that governing in the interests of the most vulnerable is fundamentally
the ‘right’ thing to do) and those of efficacy (that other governance objec-
tives are more achievable if individuals and groups are taken into account).
Hence, of central concern to this volume is the idea that a broad inter-
pretation of human security within governance, including elements of
distributive justice, is necessary from the perspective of legitimacy, but
also for the long-term construction of peace by transforming conflictual
relationships.
Human security is a multidisciplinary paradigm for understanding
global vulnerabilities at the level of individual human beings. It incor-
porates methodologies and analysis from a number of research fields
including strategic and security studies, development studies, human
rights, international relations, and the study of international organisations.
It exists at the point where these disciplines converge on the concept of
protection. The UN Development Programme (UNDP)’s Human Devel-
opment Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security is seen as the
prime foundational document for the global governance mission with
regard to human security. It noted that the objective of security has
changed from states to human beings and commented on the importance
of a more human-centric approach to security (UNDP 1994). The Report
also recognised that freedom from want and freedom from fear constitute
important perspectives on poverty and development. Indeed, there is a
close relationship between human security envisioned as the protection of
persons, and human development as the provision of basic human needs.
Human security and human development are both people-centred
(Peou 2014). They challenge the orthodox approach to security and
development (i.e. state security and liberal economic growth, respec-
tively). Both perspectives are multidimensional, and address people’s
dignity as well as their material and physical concerns. Both impose duties
on the wider global community. They can be seen as mutually reinforcing.
A peaceful environment frees individuals and governments to move from
a focus on mere survival to a position where they can consider improve-
ment of their situations. Likewise, as a society develops, it is able to afford
more doctors, hospitals, welfare networks, internal security operations,
schools, and de-mining operations. Conversely, as former UN Secretary-
General Kofi Annan observed in his UN Report In Larger Freedom, “we
will not enjoy security without development, development without secu-
rity, and neither without respect for human rights. Unless all these causes
 1 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND UN IMPLEMENTATION 5

are advanced, none will succeed” (Annan 2005, p. 6). Conflict retards
development, and underdevelopment can lead to conflict.

The Roles of the United Nations

From League of Nations Mandates to the UN Trusteeship Council, a
global obligation has been acknowledged that such territories were to
be administered in the best interests of their inhabitants. The mandate
system was established by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of
Nations, and referred to territories which after the war were no longer
ruled by their previous sovereign (defeated powers in World War I), but
their peoples were not considered “able to stand by themselves under the
strenuous conditions of the modern world”. The article called for such
people’s tutelage to be “entrusted to advanced nations who by reason of
their resources, their experience or their geographical position can best
undertake this responsibility”. League of Nations Mandates were of the
nature of both a treaty and a constitution, and they contained minority
rights clauses that provided for the rights of petition and adjudication by
the Permanent Court of International Justice (Wright 1930). Mandates
were to be administered as a “sacred trust of civilisation” to develop the
territory for the benefit of its native people (Matz 2005). With the disso-
lution of the League of Nations after World War II, it was stipulated at
the Yalta Conference that the remaining Mandates should be placed under
the trusteeship of the UN, under similar governance principles.
Post-independence, in some cases however, promotion of the security
and integrity of the newly independent entities came at the expense of
ignoring the concerns of citizens who sought security in their daily lives.
For these common citizens, security meant “protection from the threat of
disease, hunger, unemployment, crime, social conflict, political repression
and environmental hazards”, the very things that would grant their daily
survival (UNDP 1994, p. 22). The international community has, there-
fore begun to address threats not only between, but also within states,
and focus on the security of people in addition to that of states. It is in
this context that the concept of human security has come to the fore and,
as detailed below, the UN has taken leadership and coordination positions
on human security in both theory and practice.
This in turn amounts to a dilemma for UN governance and admin-
istration of territories. The organisation is dedicated to maintenance
6 B. M. HOWE ET AL.

of the Westphalian system of states, and the principle of national self-

determination. Such prioritisation is reiterated in a number of statutory
defences of national sovereignty in the constitutive documents of inter-
national organisations under the UN system, in the prohibitions against
intervention, and the prescription that, should it be required, sovereignty
should be restored as soon as possible. Indeed, the organisation has been
instrumental in bringing a number of states into legal existence through
processes of national self-determination. Yet the UN is increasingly also
dedicated to the demands of human-centric good governance, whereby
safe havens are provided for the most vulnerable free from fear, want, and
even indignity, not only during the involvement of the UN but also as
part of its legacy.
This dilemma becomes acute when the UN is forced to intervene
in a ‘failed’ state, and temporarily take over its administration. The
international legal demands of sovereignty require the minimal level of
interference to prevent killings and other mass atrocities, with a swift
withdrawal. The normative demands of good human-centred governance
require a focus on well-being as much as safety, and a long-term commit-
ment to ensure that such governance objectives remain a priority once the
UN leaves. In short, global governance can be seen as a system designed
to ensure effective collective action in addressing challenges to human
security (Peou 2014). The fact that the UN has often conspicuously
failed itself to provide such safe havens speaks to the efficacy evaluation
component of governance.

Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding

Peacekeeping has been the flagship operation of the UN, and its major
contribution to global governance and the protection of vulnerable
groups (Howe and Kondoch 2016, p. 1). Uniquely universal and legit-
imate, it has been seen as a “strong and effective tool that is protecting
people, saving lives and helping countries to emerge from conflict” (Ban
2014). Since the earliest manifestations of UN peacekeeping operations
(UNPKOs), legal and normative issues have been extensively discussed by
policymakers and also scholars such as Derek W. Bowett (1964), Rosalynn
Higgins (1969, 1970, 1980, 1981), and Finn Seyersted (1966). Tradi-
tionally, international lawyers have addressed the constitutionality of UN
peacekeeping, the rule of law in the peacekeeping context, the legal status
of UN peacekeepers, issues related to command and control, the legal
 1 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND UN IMPLEMENTATION 7

constraints arising from the application of international humanitarian law,

international human rights law and international criminal law, specific
problems under the domestic law of the sending state, the protection
of UN personnel serving in UNPKOs, as well as the responsibilities and
liabilities of the UN, sending states, and individual peacekeeper under
international law (Howe et al. 2015, p. 3).
The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) published
The United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Principles and Guidelines,
which is also known as the Capstone Doctrine. In the Capstone Doctrine,
the DPKO (2008, p. 18) outlines key principles and guidelines for
UNPKOs and defines peacekeeping as an “action undertaken to preserve
peace, however fragile, where fighting has been halted and to assist in
implementing agreements achieved by the peacemakers”. Another often-
quoted definition can be found in the Agenda for Peace, “peacekeeping
is the deployment of a United Nations presence in the field, hitherto
with the consent of all parties concerned, normally involving United
Nations military and/or police personnel and frequently civilians as well.
Peacekeeping is a technique that expands the possibilities for both the
prevention of conflict and making of peace” (Boutros-Ghali 1992, para.
20). Many authors also prefer the broader term “peace operations”,
which may be defined as “field operations deployed to prevent, manage,
and/or resolve violent conflicts or reduce the risk of their recurrence”
(DPKO 2008, p. 98). Peace operations “entail three principal activities:
conflict prevention and peacemaking; peacekeeping; and peace-building”
(Brahimi 2000, para. 10, p. 2). Peacekeeping rather than peace opera-
tions is, however, the preferred term at the UN, as the latter “smelled
too Western and interventionist” for member states from the South to
endorse (Kuehne 2009, p. 7).
Nevertheless, UN governance activities have seen a steady expansion
in terms of interventionism, legal and normative competence, and obliga-
tions. New legal issues related to peacekeeping mandates which have been
addressed include detentions by UN peacekeepers, international policing,
the use of new weapons systems such as drones, the use of private mili-
tary companies (PMCs), accountability for violations of human rights
by peacekeepers, peace enforcement and the use of force (Howe et al.
2015, pp. 4–6). New normative areas of discussion and practical growth
include the protection of civilians (POC) (Wills 2009; White 2009), the
R2P (Barber 2009; Francis et al. 2012; Hassler 2010; Hunt and Bellamy
2011), responsibility while protecting (Kenkel and Stefan 2016), the
8 B. M. HOWE ET AL.

responsibility to rebuild (Fleck 2012; Pattison 2015), and, more broadly,

human security (Benedek et al. 2010; Uesugi 2004; Peou 2014).

Legality
In general, the legal framework of UNPKOs can be derived from the UN
Charter; the mandate provided by the UN Security Council (UNSC);
mission-specific legal instruments including agreements with the troop-
contributing States, Participation Agreements and with the host State,
Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) or Status of Missions Agreements
(SOMAs), rules of engagement, and UN regulations (Howe et al. 2015,
p. 8). The mandate formulated in an enabling resolution by the UNSC
or exceptionally in a UN General Assembly (GA) resolution contains
the legal basis under international law for the deployment of a UNPKO
(ibid.). As Michael Bothe (2003, p. 265) remarks, “(t)he mandate of a
peace operation is the source of its powers and at the same time the limi-
tation of its powers”. At its most fundamental PKOs are tools of conflict
management, including those conflicts which are viewed as intractable,
wherein the worst manifestations of conflict (interstate wars) are reduced
by keeping combatants apart.
Even though the UN Charter does not provide for an explicit autho-
risation of peacekeeping operations, there is agreement that the legal
basis for consensual peacekeeping operations falls between Chapter VI
(peaceful settlement of disputes) and Chapter VII (enforcement measures
to maintain or restore international peace and security) (Howe et al.
2015, p. 10). UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld referred to the
mythical “Chapter VI and a half” (Ramsbotham and Woodhouse 1999,
p. xi). Yet there remains considerable debate over which Charter provi-
sions are exactly the legal basis of international peacekeeping and how
to allocate authority among the UNSC, the UNGA, and the Secretariat,
represented by the Secretary-General. Under Article 24(1) of the UN
Charter, the UNSC has the primary responsibility for the maintenance
of international peace and security, and in accordance with Article 29,
has the power to create peacekeeping forces as its subsidiary organs.
According to Article 98 of the UN Charter, the Council may entrust
the Secretary-General with certain functions.
A number of articles within Chapter VII have been championed as
serving as the legal foundation, either alone or in conjunction with
 1 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND UN IMPLEMENTATION 9

each other. These include: Article 39 “The Security Council shall deter-
mine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace,
or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what
measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to main-
tain or restore international peace and security;” Article 40: “the Security
Council may, before making the recommendations or deciding upon the
measures provided for in Article 39, call upon the parties concerned to
comply with such provisional measures as it deems necessary or desirable;”
Article 41: “measures not including the use of armed force;” Article 42:
“such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or
restore international peace and security;” and Article 48: “action required
to carry out the decisions of the Security Council for the maintenance
of international peace and security shall be taken by all the Members of
the United Nations or by some of them, as the Security Council may
determine”.
In 1957, Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld laid down the three
key principles of classical UNPKOs (as opposed to the more recent
conceptualizations of peace enforcement for humanitarian reasons). First,
they require the consent of the parties to the conflict. Second, they
should be ‘neutral’ (impartial). Third, force should not be used except
in self-defence. Even though these bedrock principles of international
peacekeeping have been confirmed by the UN in policy documents and
by member states in the annual meetings of the Special Committee
on Peacekeeping (C34) ever since, peacekeeping has evolved over time,
and practice has challenged these core principles repeatedly, especially
regarding the use of force for humanitarian protection (see Peou 2003).
From a contemporary legal perspective, one may distinguish between
consensual and non-consensual PKOs based on Chapter VII of the UN
Charter. Many contemporary PKOs are established under Chapter VII of
the UN Charter and they do not in a strict sense require the consent of
the parties to the conflict (Howe et al. 2015, p. 9). There are also authori-
sations to use of force for POC, and not just in self-defence. Furthermore,
in 2013, the UNSC established a Force Intervention Brigade (FIB) within
the UN Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The FIB has a mandate to use force preventively and to carry out offensive
operations against spoilers (ibid.). Thus, in both 2013 and 2014, Russia
warned that “what was once the exception now threatens to become
unacknowledged standard practise” and “in some may even run counter
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.