Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T18:33:27.950Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conflict prevention and conflict resolution: limits of multilateralism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2010

Fred Tanner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Résumé

Au cours des années 90, l'intérêt de la recherche et de la pratique sʼest tourné vers la prévention de conflits, cʼest-à-dire toute activité tendant à gérer ou à résoudre des situations conflictuelles avant quʼelles ne dégénèrent en affrontement ouvert et violent. Cet article examine les possibilités et les chances de succès d'actions de prévention entreprises, soit par un État, soit dans un contexte multilatéral. L'expérience des dernières années démontre clairement que les États ne souhaitent pas sʼexposer dans un conflit qui ne les concerne pas directement. Les conflits d'aujour d'hui en appellent done à des stratégies plus complexes, et seule une approche multilatérale a une chance d'aboutir à des résultats satisfaisants. Il existe aujourd'hui un grand nombre d'organisations gouvernementales et non gouvernementales — universelles et régionales, grandes et petites —, chacune avec un mode d'action bien distinct, ce qui permet l'engagement de l'une ou de l'autre, selon les données de la situation.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of the Red Cross , Volume 82 , Issue 839: Humanitaire action and prevention/Action humanitaire et prévention , September 2000 , pp. 541 - 559
Copyright
Copyright © International Committee of the Red Cross 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

l See, e.g., Preventing Deadly Conflict: Final Report, with Executive Summary, Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict, New York, December 1997.Google Scholar

2 Brown, Michael (ed.), The International Dimension of Internal Conflict, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1997Google Scholar; Gurr, Ted Robert, Minorities at Risk: A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflicts, United States Institute for Peace Press, Washington, DC, 1993Google Scholar; Van Evera, Stephen, “Hypotheses on nationalism and war”, in Robert J. Art and Robert Jervis, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Politics, Harper Collins, New York, 1996, pp. 5–39Google Scholar. Final Report of the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict, op. cit. (note 1 ), Chapter 5: The responsibility of States, leaders, and civil society.

3 The main studies are: Our Global Neighbourhood, Commission on Global Governance, 1995; Brian Urquhart and Erskine Childers, A World in Need of Leadership: Tomorrow's United Nations, 1996; Words to Deeds: Strengthening the UN's Enforcement Capabilities, International Task Force on the Enforcement of UN Security Council Resolutions, 1997.

4 Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to General Assembly Resolution 53/35: The fall of Srebrenica, General Assembly Doc. A/54/549, 15 November 1999. Report of the independent inquiry into the actions of the United Nations during the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda, United Nations, 15 December 1999.

5 Stedman, Stephen, “Alchemy for a new world order overselling preventive diplomacy”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 74, May 1995, p. 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 From Reaction to Prevention: Opportunities for the UN System in the New Millennium, Conference Report, International Peace Academy, New York, April 2000, p. 2.

7 Our Global Neighbourhood, op. cit. (note 3).

8 Leatherman, Janie, DeMars, William et al. , Breaking Cycles of Violence, Kumerian Press, West Hartford, 1999, p. 3.Google Scholar

9 Annan, Kofi, Annual Report of the Secretary-General, 1999 (para. 69).Google Scholar

10 Op. cit. (note 3).

11 Rwanda Report, op. cit. (note 4), p. 21.

12 Srebrenica Report, op. cit. (note 4), p. 17

13 Rwanda Report, op. cit. (note 4), p. 22.

14 United Nations Protection Force, UN Department of Public Information, September 1996, see http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/.

15 Rwanda Report, op. cit. (note 4), p. 41.

16 The Economist, 25 June 1998, p. 51.

17 On 28 March 1997, the Security Council authorized the deployment of an Italian-led multinational military and humanitarian mission in Albania.

18 Op. cit. (note 8), p. 4.

19 UN Secretary-General's address at the 47th Annual Conference of NGOs, 1994.

20 Luck, Edward C., “Blue ribbon power: Independent commissions and UN reform”, International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 1, Issue 1, April 2000, p. 99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Op. cit. (note 8), p. 20.

22 XXIst International Conference of the Red Cross (Istanbul, 1969), Resolution XXI: Contacts between National Societies in cases of armed conflicts.

23 Kosirnik, René, Some questions and answers regarding the ICRC and preventive actions, Round Table on Preventive Action, Copenhagen, ICRC, Geneva, p. 6.Google Scholar

24 Sandoz, Yves, “The Red Cross and peace: Realities and limits”, Journal for Peace Research, No. 3, 1987, p. 293.Google Scholar

25 “From reaction to prevention: Opportunities for the UN system in the new millennium”, Conference Report, International Peace Academy, New York, 2000, p. 5.

26 Ibid.

27 Preventing Deadly Conflict, op. cit. (note 2), Chapter 5.

28 Luttwak, Edward N., “Give war a chance”, Foreign Affairs, July/August 1999, pp. 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Keynote address by Dr. Sommaruga, ICRC President, 23 June 1998, Geneva Centre for Security Policy, see http://www.gcsp.ch.