ブックタイトル佐藤栄作論文集９～１６

概要

佐藤栄作論文集９～１６

第15回最優秀賞By the same token, while the CIS appealed to the UN for its legitimate status as aregional organisation with a view to cooperate with the OSCE, behind this lies thatonly the CIS is to be a single access to the West. This ignores the UN principals andpurposes of state sovereignty and political independence bounding on each CIS state.The observance of the texts of collective security treaties within the CIS is one thingand actual peacekeeping is another.However, the CIS peacekeeping has a unique element to be assessed within theconcept of new UN peacekeeping. The close border contiguity and historical Russianinfluence within the CIS had created collective security treaties at the first place andthen moved to organise so-called CIS peacekeeping forces. This procedure has beenlacking in former Yugoslavia. Russia’s political willingness, positively or negatively,worked to some extent to bring disputants to negotiation tables.If the UN’s peacekeeping even in cooperation with regional organisations finds itunsuccessful, the Russia’s assertion of the CIS peacekeeping possibly paves the wayfor a new approach in regional conflict management. However, as lack of both militaryequipment to organise peacekeeping forces in some CIS states and a political willof the international community to deal with the CIS issue is too apparent to accuseRussia, the UN’s role is to persuade Russia and the CIS states not to harm the CIScollective security treaties as a diplomatic step to settlement.The history of the Organisation of American States (OAS), started as an anticommunismalliance, testifies that its approaches to conflict management are similarto the UN and the CIS peacekeeping, but more emphasizes respect for democracyand human rights.However, the reality is that the US as a regional power can also manipulate theorganisation. The US has established technology network in the name of collective647