Striking the Balance: Airpower Rules of Engagement in Peace Operations
Abstract
Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and demise of the Cold War, the United States has embarked on a national security policy principally focused on democratization and economic engagement. A natural outgrowth of this Wilsonian response to the strategic environment has been an increased number of operations colloquially called operations other than war. These operations may be very much like war in the conventional sense or may be confined to humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping. In such operations, the US may intervene unilaterally if vital interests are at stake, but typically, the US will attempt to gainer consensus and create a multinational or coalition effort before crossing into uncharted territory alone. A corollary and necessary consideration when contemplating intervention either in a failed or failing state is the role and relationship the United Nations plays as a supranational organization to the multinational force providers. United Nations Security Council Resolutions often set the parameters and establish the legal precedence for intervention. Yet the United Nations itself has a difficult time in defining some of these operations as either peacekeeping or peace enforcement under existing language in the UN Charter. In some cases, operations include elements of both peacekeeping and enforcement occurring at the same time. A natural result of such ill-defined operations are equally difficult and confusing Rules-of-Engagement (ROE).
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jan 01, 1999
- Accession Number
- ADA391759
Entities
People
- Richard M. Perry
Organizations
- Air University