UN-Led or Non-UN-Led Peacekeeping Operations?
Heldt, Birger. 2004. “UN-led or Non-UN-led Peacekeeping Operations?”, IRI Review, 9:113-138, 2004.
14 Pages Posted: 12 Apr 2013
Date Written: September 15, 2004
Non-UN-led peacekeeping operations have during 1948-2000 been as frequent as UN-led operations. But are, as commonly claimed, non-UN-led peacekeeping operations more likely to succeed than UN-led operations? Or is it the case, and just as implied by the UN Charter, that regional peacekeeping operations and UN peacekeeping operations are substitutable and complementary tolls for addressing threats to international peace and security? The empirical accuracy of these claims has clearly large policy implications for the ongoing debate on whether the UN or regional actors should be entrusted with peacekeeping tasks.
This article provides a brief inventory of theories and empirical evidence on whether non-UN-led peacekeeping operations are more or less likely to succeed than UN-led operations. It finds that whereas the theories may be compelling, the only large-scale comparative empirical study fails to identify any robust difference in success rates.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Peacekeeping Operations: Global Patterns of Intervention and Success, 1948-2004
By Birger Heldt and Peter Wallensteen
Partial Peace Rebel Groups Inside and Outside Civil War Settlements
Are Intrastate Peacekeeping Operations Less Likely to Succeed? Some Statistical Evidence
By Birger Heldt