War Fighting and Peacekeeping are not Compatible. essays

War Fighting and Peacekeeping are not Compatible. essays Canadas Peace Enforcement, and ignorance to the true definition of Peacekeeping, has destroyed our true intentions of our missions to keep the peace, as we are so reputable of doing. How have are peacekeeping missions given Canada an identity? Has our recent peace enforcement altered this definition? What would cause our men to lose grip halfway through a mission? Canada has quickly made an international, highly respected, name for itself, and due to ignorance, is quickly losing it. The two definitions of Peacekeeping vs. Peace Enforcement according to humanitarian law are what the men are to abide by and are as follows: The purpose of Peacekeeping operations is to ensure respect for cease-fires and demarcation lines and to conclude troop withdrawal agreements. In the past few years, the scope of operations has been extended to cover other tasks such as the supervision of elections, the forwarding of humanitarian relief, and assistance in the national reconciliation process. The use of force is authorized only in cases of legitimate defence. Such operations take place with the consent of the parties on the ground. Peace-enforcement operations, come under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, and are carried out by UN forces or by States, groups of States or regional organizations, either at the invitation of the State concerned or with the authorization of the UN Security Council. These forces are given a combat mission and are authorized to use coercive measures for carrying out their mandate. The consent of the parties is not necessarily required. The distinction between these two types of operation has become less clear in recent years. The term Peace support operations, has also started to emerge. Two main missions that support the fact that Canadas mission to keep the peace, are those in Somalia and Bosnia where ignorance to the true definition of Peacekeeping...