Peacekeeping is one of the important areas of concern in the modern times, especially with the rise of the levels of the power that is given to certain nations due to their excellence and command in military forces and nuclear weapons. Thus, peacekeeping commands the inclusion of the activities that tend to support the matter of ensuring peace and conditions that favour an everlasting impact on this peace related activities. The role of the US, which is one of the most powerful and commanding nations in the peacekeeping body that is constituted by the UN, is very important and cannot be taken away by any other member nation.

The Role of the US

Firstly, it is important to highlight here the amount of resources and the access to the resources over which the Americans have control. They state have at their command the world currency in which most of the trade is being conducted today. They have the major impact on shaping the decision making of various countries’ policy regarding external affairs. It is the US that has the power and position to make sure that there does not rise a situation that could lead to another World War or something alike that is given the rise in destructive capacity of arms and ammunitions, since this could exterminate the entire human race (Tallberg, 2007, pp. 79).

Responsibilities

The US with its troops safeguarding many nations of international importance that have an access to some of the most coveted resources have to make sure that they should not look forward to satisfying their own selfish interests by exploiting nations like Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan (Boer, 2007, pp. 62).

It is known that peacekeeping operations require much potential resources like military and logistic activities. When international bodies like the UN are taking care of this activity of peacekeeping, their duty is to ensure that the nations among conflict have to submit to the fact of a common good.

The Options in Front of the US

The important question that is being addressed here is whether US at all, unilaterally, or multi-laterally takes place in the peacekeeping operations when it does not serve any of its selfish interests for the achievement of the common good. Global peace and security can only be supported with an effort from nations like these to come up and make their resources available to help in the causes that concern the entire humanity and which can never be taken care of or dealt by nations alone at an individual level (Dumas, 2009, pp. 83).

Till date, only two events have been noticeable in demonstrating the role that the US has played in the peacekeeping operations, most of which were for national self-interests only though. One is  the Cold War and the second is Clinton’s Presidential Decision Directive 25 (PDD 25), which to an extent fostered the US to adopt the practise of multilateralism.

Implementation in Reality

The US culture induced the development and evolution of self-interest multilateralism wherein the benefits of the peacekeeping would be fostered towards the interest of one individual community rather than a group. In a report from Africa, it is said that there was much greater expectation from the US in making successful the UN peacekeeping operations. The US needed to deploy more resources, forces, and military assets to support the cause of Civilian Protection. It needed to provide more strategic lift capacity and expert personnel who could help in accelerating the process of the UN peacekeeping move. It must work together with the UN on the development of skilled personnel for peacekeeping operations by imparting training in this field of interest.

The Lack of Support

The Canadian nations have seen a fall in participation and contribution towards the peacekeeping operations since 1995. Post 1995 the Canadians have been channelizing their support through NATO and not directly to the UN.

The Possible Contribution from the US

As put forward by Barack Obama, the US President, that it is in the self-interests of everyone to contribute towards this cause of international peacekeeping. Thus, it is important from the part of the US to contribute effectively towards funding of this noble cause of protecting the civilians, maintaining peace in the war-torn societies, and rebuilding their society. Last year, the US ambassador to the UN peacekeeping operations, Susan Rice, commented on the five principles that US would be adopting and that are recommended for others to follow.

Through this agenda, she emphasized the fact that the US would be showing an increased amount of participation together with nations who actively contribute to this cause by offering to billions of individuals all round the globe the prospect of a better and much more secured, prosperous, and dignified future. Indirectly, what the US can do is that it can increase its co-operation and co-ordination with nations who contribute their efforts and resources for training and development of peacekeeping staff (Ramarajan, Bezrukova, Karen, Euwema, & Kop, 2004, pp. 178).

Conclusion

However, the relative contribution from US has been relatively low ever since and has been declining as time is passing. In the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia, it could be easily felt how the US was only interested in supporting peacekeeping activities as long as it served its self-interests. Being a developed nation and having much stronger economy, much is expected of the US that is given the kind of superiority that it commands and at which it constantly fails. There is a great disparity between what it can, what it promise and what it actually does.

Order now

Related essays