For peace operations —even those authorised under Chapter VII
with mandates to protect civilians—
the UN relies on a standby arrangement system
that is helpful in normal circumstances, but is insufficient, 
even prone to fail under more demanding crises
What might the international community do to prevent mass atrocities and to protect civilians at risk? Like the word 'peace', the laudable norms of protection and prevention appear suspect when applied by traditional military means. In Libya, NATO's demonstrations of high-tech war with the initial shock and awe were too reminiscent of Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan. Each failed to provide sustainable security.
So where does this leave us? At the last World Summit, the UN Security Council expressed support for timely and decisive responses to stem mass atrocity crimes. This summer, the issue will be the focus of the UN General Assembly. Syria has heightened the urgency. Sudan magnifies it. Brazil renewed interest in the lingering questions of how and with what to prevent mass atrocities and protect civilians by suggesting a 'responsibility while protecting'.2 For now, NATO remains the default choice as we lack a reliable alternative for the more demanding operations. Officials may soon be under pressure to deliver better policy options.
Numerous challenges complicate the problem.
- Hits: 8492
Shanghai, Sept.8.─ Students at Shanghai's Sheshan Catholic seminary, one of China's biggest, learned on August 22nd that classes would be suspended indefinitely. The announcement was another twist in the latest standoff between Catholics and the government that began on July 7th.