this has been one of the areas of intense scrutiny about the organization. Proponents to this argument claim that the UN should not adhere to international biases about certain regions of the world and that it should carry out its mandate irrespective of this matter. Consequently, it can be argued that this international organisation has clearly laid out rules and regulations with regard to prevention of armed conflict, however, their selectivity on particular areas is undermining their peace making role.
It should however, be noted that the latter scenario is not the general trend within the African continent. In fact, it can be argued that this continent has taken up the largest chunk of peacekeeping operations within the United Nations. However, the conditions favouring intervention have been questionable given its inconsistency in the continent. In fact, it can be argued that despite the many peacekeeping efforts that have been going on in Africa, the proportion of resources and time required for these interventions do not meet the challenges that are inherent in this region.
Reconciliation of warring communities in coalition based governments
The United Nations may engage in peacekeeping missions when a country had been formed out of the unification of differing regions, countries or communities. Theodorides (1982) explains this scenario under the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus. The UN decided to participate in this mission three years after the formation of Cyprus as an independent state. Problems began arising after the rising conflict between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots with the latter’s rights being subdued by the former through the constitution. These tensions began showing through a violence outbreak that occurred in the year 1963 thus causing necessitating some interventions.
The issues in Cyprus were also related to problems in constitution making. There were complains that Turkey was interfering in the affairs of the United Kingdom and that it had intentions of engaging in aggression against the United Kingdom of Cyprus. In the subsequent year of 1964, the United Nations decided to enter Cyprus through the formation of an external body known as the United Nations Peacekeeping Force In Cyprus. The body had been created so as to ensure that the rule of law was adhered to in this nation and that the 1963 violence between the communities was not propagated.
The United Nations Security Council carried out its peacekeeping operations through this body that had been set up specifically for the United Kingdom of Cyprus. The most instrumental time at which the UN depicted their importance and presence was during a coup de tat in the year 1974. At that time, some Cypriots originating from Greece attempted to seek alliance with their native country. On the other hand, their adversaries were interested in taking over a part of the northern part of the country. Consequently, there was a need to unite these warring factions by negotiating ceasefire agreements and looking into some of the issues that these groups had to contend with. Besides that the Security Council made a number of resolutions that were centred on preventing the occurrences of the 1974 de tat. (Theodorides, 1982)
Irrespective of some of the successes in Cyprus, peace negotiations by the UNFICYP had hit some snarls in a number of ways. This is because there are still certain challenges in this country that show how peace is yet to be achieved. All in all, the latter body has indicated how the United Nations deals with security matters facing such united countries and what would necessitate their entry into such lands.
In close relations to this body is another commission that was formed when Ethiopia and Eritrea were separated as nations. Their situation was somewhat different from the Cyprus one because in Cyprus, two different factions were unified whereas in Ethiopia and Eritrea, two different groups were separated. In order to handle the challenges that emanate from such issues, it is imperative for the latter body to look into the overall questions that are prevalent with regard to the kind of problems facing them. (Theodorides, 1982)
Following the separation of Eritrea and Ethiopia, the United Nations decided to participate in peaceful negotiations though the formation of an external body know as the Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission. The latter countries decided to sign an agreement in the year 2000 that was signed in Algiers. In order to ensure adherence to this agreement and respect to the rule of law, the latter commission was formed. Most of the work carried out by the latter commission mostly deals with the challenges that are likely to crop up when dealing with two countries that have newly created boundaries.
Some of these challenges include claims of injury and damage conducted by one government against another government. The formation of such a commission was in adherence to the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement signed by member states within this international body. Additionally, the latter commission was in accordance with the Geneva Convention that had been set up to ensure compliance to humanitarian and international laws.
There are a number of challenges that are facing such commissions owing to the fact that it can be extremely tedious to cope with multiple filing systems that may be related to judicial matters affecting both countries. This is especially the case because the Commission is not located within any of these two countries and it has been handling a large number of cases that mandate from either of these bodies. According to Article 5 of their rules and procedures, some clarity has been laid out with regard to filing mass claims. However, this issue is not a straight forward one because the latter body has chosen to operate without it.
Governance of post conflict societies
The United Nations ought to operate in accordance with the UN Security Charter with regard to a number of issues facing post conflict societies. In his book “United Nations Governance of post Conflict Societies”, it has been found that there are certain contradictions in the peacekeeping role that the UN plays when governing post conflict nations. This was done in Matheson’s (2001) book through the use of two countries i.e. East Timor and Kosovo.
In the latter mentioned book, Matheson (2001) cites the issue of interference in matters that are in essence domestic jurisdiction. Through Article 2 of the UN Security Charter, the UN is given the mandate to do any of the following during its administrative role within post conflict societies
Change political structures
Alter territorial status
Modify legal systems
Matheson (2001) notes that by exercising these rights, then the UN peacekeeping missions may end up taking the role of what sovereign states are supposed to carry out through the actions of their leaders. It should also be noted that the latter functions can only be exercised in extreme situations where the UN feels that failure to act in such a manner may jeopardise the chances of peace and international security. But the contradiction arises in the fact that the UN is the one with the mandate to determine when such a scenario occurs. Many government related policies are actually thought to fall in line with the domestic jurisdiction of a particular country and it would therefore be difficult for the UN not to cause some conflict of interest with these bodies.
When dealing with issues regarding boundary alteration, it is likely that many nations will be in firm opposition to it. This is an extremely sensitive matter and would therefore put into question the legitimacy and the success of peace keeping missions conducted by the United Nations as an International administrator in this regard.
It should also be noted that the issue of boundaries has both elements of international law and domestic law. This is because boundaries affect other nations. However, the option to alter them is an issue of the sovereignty of states. Matheson (2001) also argues that it may sometimes be tricky determining which measures are enforcement measures and which ones are not.
Korhonen (2001) also explains that international organisations are now adopting intrusive roles when conducting their peace negotiations or their peace missions. However, he also argues that post conflict administration is a crucial role in fostering peace for the UN and other bodies because of the fact that it ensures the steady flow of political, economic and social well being in countries that have been host to conflict. For instance, through their mandate as administrators, then the UN can ensure that elections are conducted in a democratic manner. In other words, peace negotiations are justified when the UN finds it necessary to ensure that fair elections are conducted in such politically sensitive areas.
Besides these, the UN has a legal mandate for participating in post conflict regions or countries when there are concerns about security levels. This is because such territories are always in danger of falling victim to security threats. Examples of countries in which these kinds of concerns have been eminent include Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo. In certain circumstances, the administrative role may take the form of civil society development. Conflict torn regions often find themselves in situations where they cannot handle the challenges that emanate out of the very nature of these circumstances when dealing with some of the issues. It should also be noted that a large share of the problems facing some the United Nations as administrators are highly ambitious thus making it extremely difficult for these kinds of issues to be addressed properly on their