NYU-A#7-MH Maura Hegarty November 5, 2000 International Organizations and Their Management – Prof. Kamal                                                                                                 The UN Peacekeeping Operation in Cambodia: Successes and Failures Introduction: Since the end of the Cold War, peacekeeping operations have become the main focus of the United Nations.  The fall of Communism and the lingering effects of decolonization have led to an increasing number of conflicts within and between countries. While the UN has struggled to meet the needs of various states, ethnic groups and regional communities, it has not always been able to do so.  Some peacekeeping operations have been successful, while others have failed.  An examination of the UN mission in Cambodia reveals the successes and failures of that operation and provides a general view of the complexity of UN peacekeeping. Background to the Conflict in Cambodia and UN Involvement: Foreign intervention and internal conflict have plagued Cambodia for years.  The country achieved independence from France in 1953 and was led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk until 1970, when he was overthrown by Lon Nol.  At this time the country was in turmoil due to the Vietnam War, which was quickly spilling over into Cambodian territory.  Pol Pot, leader of the Khmer Rouge, took control of the government in 1975 and initiated the terror that killed three million Cambodians and became known as the killing fields. In December of 1979, Vietnam invaded Cambodia and declared a new government, the People’s Republic of Kampuchea.  This resulted in a civil war with the Khmer Rouge fighting against the Vietnamese backed government.  The changing international environment led the Soviet Union to encourage a resolution of the conflict. In 1989 the major parties met at the Paris Peace Conference, which laid out the guidelines for a settlement of the conflict and UN involvement. UN Resolution 717 established UNAMIC, the United Nations Advanced Mission in Cambodia, which was designed to maintain the cease-fire and initiate mine-awareness. This mission was subsumed under UNTAC, the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia, which was established to implement the Paris Agreements. “The mandate included aspects relating to human rights, the organization and conduct of elections, military arrangements, civil administration, maintenance of law and order, repatriation and resettlement of refugees and displaced persons and rehabilitation of Cambodian infrastructure.”  UNTAC - Successes: It is obvious from the mandate above that UNTAC was given a wide range of responsibilities. Out of this considerable mandate, the electoral process established by the UN was considered the greatest success.  UNTAC registered 4.2 million voters and oversaw the adoption of electoral law.  In addition, almost 90% of eligible voters participated in the elections.  “Although the election campaign was conducted in an atmosphere of extreme fragile neutrality, in general it was a success in that all parties were given the opportunity for free expression and the electorate was not subjected to serious forms of intimidation.”  An additional area of success in the Cambodian operation was the repatriation component.  UNTAC faced a serious problem in relocating refugees because of the unsuccessful nature of the mine awareness and mine clearing programs under UNAMIC and the difficulty in relocating refugees to land they no longer wanted.  A large number of refugees had been in camps for many years and had adapted to urban life and therefore, were not interested in returning to their land.  Though UNTAC encountered problems, almost 220,000 refugees were repatriated and only 40,000 eligible voters remained in refugee camps at the time of the election.   Finally, the rehabilitation of the basic infrastructure can be considered a moderate success.  UNTAC, along with the UNDP, were successful in establishing the basic levels of infrastructure in water provision, health, agriculture and education.   UNTAC succeeded, in the face of great adversary, to hold free and fair elections in a country tainted by internal conflict and bloodshed. UNTAC - Failures: The greatest failure of the UNTAC was in the military realm.  UNTAC’s mandate was to demobilize and disarm 70% of each of the four armies.  Yet, due to financial problems UNTAC’s forces were deployed at a slow rate.  This resulted in credibility problems for the UN, which made it difficult to successfully disarm the various fractions.  If the deployment had occurred at a quicker pace it would have presented a credible military commitment to the Cambodian community.  The Khmer Rouge failed to live up to its commitments to the Paris Peace Accords as they continued to initiate violence and refused to cooperate with UNTAC forces overseeing disarmament. Phase II, the disarmament phase, was scheduled to begin June 13, however the Khmer Rouge simply ignored the date.  As a result of the Khmer Rouge’s actions, other factions were unwilling to disarm and fighting quickly resumed.  The UN suspended Phase II of the program, leaving almost half a million Cambodians armed.   The civil component of the UN police force was also a failure.  This component was responsible for investigating human rights violations and pressing charges against violators or encouraging local police to do so.  This task was performed poorly and in some areas of the country was not performed at all.   The failure of the military component can be attributed directly to the inability of the newly elected government to survive. Conclusion: While UNTAC can not be viewed as a complete success, it can not be viewed as a complete failure either.  The UN mission was able to hold free and fair elections which was a large improvement over the dictatorial control of the foreign governments and military regimes that controlled the nation for the larger part of the 20th century.  However, “in spite of the limited success in establishing a government of national reconciliation, the regime could not be sustained.”   It becomes obvious that while the UN mandate was very broad, this was necessary to ensure the future peace and security of Cambodia.  By not fulfilling all parts of the mandate, UNTAC could not be a success.  Without disarmament of the warring factions, electoral success meant nothing.  There is great interdependency in peace-keeping operations and that is why they must be viewed as a whole rather than separate, individual parts.  Electoral procedure was developed and free elections were held but this is not sustainable in the absence of the UN or other third parties. For a peacekeeping operation to be considered a success it must remain in place long after the UN has left the country.  In the case of Cambodia, the future of democracy is still in doubt.