‘What might have been a new beginning for the UN turned out to be a lost opportunity’

How far do you agree with this view of UN peacekeeping after the end of the Cold War?
[30]

Keynote: Need to address nuances in the question and use anchors to ans the question;
- Need to address lost opportunity → there was opportunity but it was lost
FACETS

Focus UN Peacekeeping
Effectiveness of UN Peacekeeping

Timeframe End of Cold War; after 1989

Assumptions New beginning for UN turned out to be lost opportunity

There was opportunity after the end of bipolarity that failed to be utilized

Criteria Fulfilment of mandate

Maintenance of Peace and security

Question type Question does not require you to talk about CW period, purely PCW
effectiveness question

Intro:
A new beginning can be referred to the end of the Cold War and the end of the bipolarity
between superpowers which provided new opportunities to maintain peace and security, where
it is said to bring about greater possibility for cooperation and unity within the UN, which in
theory should help to increase the effectiveness of peacekeeping. However, in reality, there was
indeed a lost opportunity, meaning that the effectiveness of peacekeeping did not improve,
rather it was plagued with the same issues, such as the domination of Great Powers as well as
the structural limitations) that hindered the effectiveness of UN peacekeeping in the Cold War
years, henceforth, UN peacekeeping did indeed lost an opportunity to increase their
effectiveness.

TS1: The end of bipolarity seemed to have brought about greater unity and cooperation within
the UNSC, in which provided the UN opportunities to carry out more effective peacekeeping
missions and hence seemingly challenging the statement that there was a lost opportunity in the
aftermath of the Cold War years.
East Timor
 - Successfully responded to threat to international peace and security → held referendum
and set up an interim administration, sharp comparison to the bipolar years, where UN
action was paralyzed by cold war rivalry such as in the 1956 Hungarian Crisis
Cambodian Crisis
- Similar to East Timor, paralyzed by cold war rivalry, unable to respond pre-1989 due to
Soviet and China vetoes that prevented UN from interfering. After 1989, had opportunity
to interfere →set up UNTAC, organized elections and repatriation of refugees.

TS2: However, in reality, these opportunities brought about by the end of the era of bipolarity
for more effective peacekeeping missions continued to be hindered by the messy domestic
situation, showing the inability for the UN to tackle the issue despite greater cooperation,
showing a more continuary of trends than change, lending credence to the statement that a new
beginning did indeed turned out to be a lost opportunity.
East Timor
- Messy domestic situation → violence during election → cannot constitute as a total
success
Cambodian Crisis
- Failure to disarm rebels brought about by delayed deployment → unable to effectively
maintain peace and security, after UNTAC withdrew, violence erupted
Both similar to pre-Cold War peacekeeping like Congo, where messy domestic situation
prevented the UN from effectively maintaining peace and security.

TS3: Furthermore, despite opportunities for greater cooperation and hence greater opportunities
to maintain peace and security, the Great Powers still prioritized their national interest over
collective interest, as they still chose to exploit structural limitations within the UN such as the
lack of a standing army.
- Somalia
- Bosnia
- Rwanda

TS4: Adding on, opportunities brought about by the end of bipolarity is further lost when
member states in the UN prioritized their national interest, taking unilateral actions that
compromised the UN’s goal of maintaining peace and security.
Somalia
- US withdrew unilaterally → Presidential Decree 25 → seriously affected the UN ability
and key reason for failure of the UNSOM II
Bosnia
- US-led NATO unilaterally bombed Serbian positions → risk of escalating conflict
TS5: Additionally, due to their member states prioritization of their national interest over
collective interest, the era of greater cooperation brought about by the end of bipolarity was
unable to utilize to implement reforms aimed at tackling structural limitations such as
contradictions in the UN charter as well as the lack of standing army, hence proving that the
new beginning did indeed turn out to be a lost opportunity.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, while the end of the Cold War did appear to be a new beginning; a change from
the past, in reality it was actually a continuation of the trends from the Cold War era, with the
prioritisation of the national interests of the member states that severely inhibited the ability of
the organisation to act. Furthermore, the US in particular, which played an extremely influential
role in the CW-era, continued to play an extremely important role in the UN in the PCW-era.
Showing that the ECW did turn out to be a lost opportunity for a new beginning as many if not
most trends in the CW-era persisted after the ECW.