The International Peacemaking Organizations During the Pandemic of Misunderstanding
https://doi.org/10.24412/2221-3279-2021-10037
Abstract
This article aims at analyzing the performance of international organizations in the sphere of peacemaking operations in the 2019-2020 years. During the detailed description of UN performance, the author concludes that every year the UN holds about 20 peacemaking operations with 180 000 persons involved. The main UN missions are situated in the African region. In general, the UN missions provide the region with stability and decrease confl ict. However, the region undergoes the consequences of COVID-19, which seems to be another option for the next peacemaking operations of the UN. Amid the performance of the UN, which is deeply involved in the peacemaking process, the measures of preventive diplomacy of OSCE do not look so successful. The level of confi dence between the states seems to be decreasing, which also results in the absence of regular reports on the military expenditure of states – members of the Organization. Except for the crisis of confi dence, the tensions between Russia and Europe are likely to rise, which also negatively infl uences the dialogue between the countries, unsuccessful attempts to stabilize the situation in Ukraine, and the resurgence of confl ict in Nagorny Karabakh. Referring to the history of NATO peacemaking operations, the author states, that despite 3 peacemaking operations only, being a regional Organization, NATO attracted the most number of personnel involved in the peacemaking process. At the same time, the peacemaking is not the only purposes of the Organization. NATO is also involved in Mediterranean sea patrolling, staff training in Iraq, air monitoring in Ukraine. Among the members of the Organization the military expenditures are also rising. One of the reasons for such situation lies in the crisis of relations between Russia and its European partners. Being also a military organization, NATO seems to be using this crisis in its political goals and in such a way intensifying its infl uence on international arena. The following circumstances should be taken into consideration for building a proper political course of the State as well as holding effective political dialogue with its partners.
About the Author
E. P. Shanchenko
Russian Foreign Ministry; Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina P. Shanchenko
MGIMO University
Institute for International Studies
Postgraduate applicant
Primakov Institute of World Economy and International Relations
Moscow
References
1. Abashidze, A. Kto i kak otpravlyaet mirotvorcev (Who Sends Peacekeepers and How) / Analytical articles RIAC. Mode of access: https://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/analytics/kto-i-kak-otpravlyaet-mirotvortsev/
2. Belonogov, A. L. Perspektivy rasshireniya programm partnerstva NATO v nachale XXI veka: postsovetskoe prostranstvo, Balkany, «kontaktnye strany» (Prospects for Expanding NATO Partnership Programs at the Beginning of the XXI Century: the Post-Soviet Space, the Balkans, «Contact Countries») // Izvestiya Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A. I. Gercena (Proceedings of the A. I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University), 2010, No. 124, pp. 299-310.
3. Bezrukova, A. Yu. Rossiya i OBSE – novoe budushchee nachinaetsya segodnya (Russia and OSCE – a New Future Begins Today) // Sovremennaya Evropa, 2015, No. 4, pp. 81-92.
4. Boguslavskaya, Yu. K. «Vozvrashcheniye k osnovam?» NATO i Rossiya v novoy strategicheskoy obstanovke (“Back to Basics?” NATO and Russia in a New Strategic Environment) // Vestnik Saint-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 6. Politologiya. Mezhdunarodnyye otnosheniya, 2016, No. 3, pp. 93-107.
5. Fenenko, A. V. Organizaciya po bezopasnosti i sotrudnichestvu v Evrope: istoriya i perspektivy (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe: history and Prospects) // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 25. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika (Bulletin of the Moscow University.Issue. 25. International relations and world politics), 2015, No. 2, pp. 22-50.
6. Gilmutdinova, D.; Romadan, L. Novye tendencii i tekhnologii v mirotvorcheskoj deyatel’nosti Organizacii Ob”edinennyh Nacij v XXI veke (New trends and technologies in the peacekeeping activity of the United Nations in the XXI century) // Mezhdunarodnaya zhizn’, 2016, No. 2, pp. 113-124.
7. Hudajkulova, A. V. Mirotvorchestvo OON v XXI veke: osnovnye vektory reform i praktika ih implementacii (UN peacekeeping in the XXI century: the main vectors of reforms and the practice of their implementation) // Yuzhno-rossijskij zhurnal social’nyh nauk, 2019, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 109-126.
8. Kilin, Yu. Nejtral’nye gosudarstva na rasput’e: problema vstupleniya v NATO Finlyandii i SHvecii (Neutral States at the Crossroads: the Problem of Finland and Sweden Joining NATO) // Sovremennaya Evropa, 2017, Issue 2, pp. 65-76.
9. Kornilenko, A. V. Voprosy mirotvorchestva i oboronnaya politika NATO na sovremennom etape (Questions of Peacemaking and NATO’s Defense Policy at the Present Stage) // Vestnik RUDN. Politologiya, 2016, No. 4, pp. 48-56.
10. Kurylev, K. L.; Cakanyan, V. T. Cifrovaya zavisimost’ NATO (Digital Dependence of NATO) // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Istoriya i politicheskie nauki (Bulletin of the Moscow State Regional University. Series: History and Political Sciences), 2018, No. 1, pp. 45-53.
11. Mironova, D. S. Sovremennyj etap transformacii NATO (The Current Stage of NATO’s Transformation) // Rossiya i sovremenniy mir, 2017, No. 3 (96), pp. 89-102.
12. Nikitin, A. Mirotvorchestvo OON: obnovlenie principov, reformirovanie praktiki (UN Peacekeeping: Updating Principles, Reforming Practices) // Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2016, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 16-26.
13. Parhalina, T. Rossiya – Zapad: permanentnaya konfrontaciya ili vyhoda iz krizisa? (Russia-West: Permanent Confrontation or a Way out of the Crisis?) // Evropejskaya bezopasnost’: sobytiya, ocenki, prognozy, 2019, Issue 53 (69), pp. 2-7.
14. Rastol’cev, S. Rol’ OBSE v menyayushchemsya mire: shagaya v budushchee (OSCE’s Role in a Changing World: Stepping into the Future) / Analytical articles RIAC. Mode of access: https://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/analytics/rol-obse-v-menyayushchemsya-mire-shagaya-v-budushchee/
15. Sherbak, I. O povyshenii effektivnosti deyatel’nosti OBSE po predotvrashcheniyu i uregulirovaniyu konfl iktov na Evropejskom kontinente (On Improving the Effectiveness of the OSCE in Preventing and Resolving Confl icts on the European Continent) // Nauchno-analiticheskij vestnik IE RAN, 2018, No. 2, pp. 29-34.
16. Shtol’, V. Rol’ NATO v mirotvorcheskom processe. Severoatlanticheskij soyuz pretenduet na rol’ «golubyh kasok» OON (The Role of NATO in the Peacekeeping Process. The Alliance Claims to be the “Blue Helmets” of the UN). Mode of access: http://www.peacekeeper.ru/ru/?module=pages&action=view&id=62
17. Shustov, V. Evolyuciya mirotvorchestva OON (Evolution of UN Peacekeeping) // Mezhdunarodnaya zhizn’, 2008, No. 10, pp. 61-74.
18. SIPRI Yearbook 2020. Oxford University Press, 2020.
19. Voronkov, L. S. OBSE i yevropeyskaya bezopasnost’. Chto dal’she? (OSCE and European Security. What’s Next?) // Sovremennaya Evropa, 2018, No. 1, pp. 69-79.
20. Voronkov, L. S.; Kovaleva, V. E. Mozhno li schitat’ OBSE mezhdunarodnoj mezhpravitel’stvennoj organizaciej? (Can the OSCE Be Considered an International Intergovernmental Organization? // Sovremennaya nauka, 2017, Vol. 8, No. 1-3, pp. 54-59.
21. Zvyagina, D.A. Budushchee OBSE. Vzglyad iz Evropejskogo soyuza (The Future of the OSCE. View from the European Union) // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofi ya. Sociologiya. Politologiya, 2017, No. 37, pp. 262-269.
Review
For citations:
Shanchenko E.P. The International Peacemaking Organizations During the Pandemic of Misunderstanding. Comparative Politics Russia. 2021;12(4):19-30. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24412/2221-3279-2021-10037
Views:
716
Email this article 