Say what, send the troops in?

There appears to be some public interest in assisting the humanitarian situation in Gaza by “sending in our forces”, such that the Prime Minister had cause to address it in Parliament.

The United Nations is an inter-government organisation. It has a UN Charter dated 1945 which is an international treaty which includes a prohibition of the use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Malaysia (then the Federation of Malaya) joined the UN in 1957 as its 82nd member.

The prohibition of member states of the UN from attacking other UN member states is central to the purpose for which the UN was founded after World War II.

However, the Charter allows the UN Security Council, an organ of the UN, under Chapter VII to take military and non-military action to determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression for the purpose of restoring international peace.

Malaysia has since 1960 participated in over 38 peacekeeping operations under Chapter VII, deploying more than 40,000 peacekeepers from the Malaysian Armed Forces and the Royal Malaysian Police. These are primarily peacekeepers with a protection of civilians (POC) mandate.

The POC is a responsibility which includes all parts of a peacekeeping mission, civilian, military and police functions. Under specific Security Council resolutions, peacekeepers may act within their means to halt physical violence against civilians within their areas of operation. There are very specific rules of engagement (ROE) depending on the mission mandate.

The UN Security Council normally gives the direction for a peacekeeping or political mission. There are five permanent members with veto power - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States (the Big 5). These were all victors of World War II and the Allies.

The fragmented Big 5

As far back as 1950, there was a concern about the lack of unanimity among the Big 5 in exercising the veto, which was seen as defeating the purpose of restoring international peace.

In that year, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) established a procedure called the Uniting for Peace Resolution 377 creating the Emergency Special Session (ESS) which allows the UNGA to consider the matter immediately with a view to restoring international peace and security, including the use of armed force.

The United States, for instance, has used its veto powers a total of 83 times, 42 of which were against resolutions condemning Israel.

In 1967, several Arab States initiated ESS under the Uniting for Peace resolution to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The ESS, as a way around a US veto to block resolutions against Israel, had more than 30 meetings on this over the next decade and has not been formally closed.

What has been the concern of the UN for a long time now is the global fragmentation of multilateralism, the foundational premise of the UN and its Charter. At the moment, global cooperation is most needed and international solidarity is in short supply.

Diplomacy for peace

In July 2023, the UN secretary-general presented at the UNGA the New Agenda for Peace, which outlines multilateral efforts for peace and security, based on international law, for a world in transition. 

The New Agenda prioritises diplomacy as the driving force for a new multilateralism not only for reducing risks of conflict. Diplomacy must be a tool to manage the heightened fractures that mark the geopolitical order today and a tool to carve out spaces for cooperation for shared interests. It is a diplomacy for peace and it must be a commitment to the pacifist settlement of disputes.

Prevention must be prioritised. Effective prevention requires comprehensive approaches, political courage, effective partnerships, sustainable resources, and national ownership. Preventive diplomacy is key.

The UN has not been oblivious to the state of multilateralism in crisis, with unilateral actions of member states or a coalition of some member states, “coalitions of the willing”, acting outside the UN Charter.

The multilateral system has also mutated and is no longer the prerogative of states with corporations, civil society organisations, and advocacy groups that produce a plethora of standards.

There is a different multilateralism emerging, one of which may be a decline of the multilateralism shaped by Western liberal hegemony. What then is the vision that would include the interests of smaller and medium-sized powers as well as civil society at large?

The UN proposes, among others, robust regional frameworks and organisations creating partnerships with the UN. These are the critical building blocks for the new multilateralism.

These are urgent in regions where longstanding security architectures are collapsing or have never been built.

When we do send in our troops, it comes at no better time than in support of the New Agenda for Peace. - Mkini

---

SALBIAH AHMAD was a civilian with the UN political mission in Afghanistan and the UN Peacekeeping Operations in Darfur, Sudan and South Sudan. The views here do not represent those of the United Nations.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.