A History of United Nations Missions in Africa

The United Nations (UN) conducts a number of peacekeeping missions throughout the world. Beginning in 1960, the UN began missions in various countries in Africa. While just one mission occurred through the 1990s, turmoil in Africa escalated and the majority of missions were run from 1989 on. Many of these peacekeeping missions were the result of civil wars or ongoing conflicts in African countries, including Angola, the Congo, Liberia, Somalia, and Rwanda. Some of the missions were brief while others lasted years at a time. To confound things, some missions replaced previous ones as tensions in the countries escalated or the political climate changed. This period is one of the most dynamic and violent in modern African history and its important to review the missions that the UN carried out. ONUC -  UN Operations in the Congo Mission Dates: July 1960 through June 1964Context: Independence from Belgium and the attempted secession of the Katanga province Outcome:  Prime Minister  Patrice Lumumba  was assassinated, at which point the mission was expanded. The Congo retained the secessionist province of Katanga and the mission was followed by civilian aid. UNAVEM I -  UN Angola Verification Mission Mission Dates:  January 1989 through May 1991Context:  Angolas lengthy civil war Outcome:  Cuban troops were withdrawn one month ahead of schedule, having completed their mission. The mission was followed by UNAVEM II (1991) and UNAVEM III (1995). UNTAG  -  UN Transition Assistance Group Mission Dates:  April 1990 through March 1990Context:  Angolan Civil War and Namibias transition to independence from South Africa Outcome:  South African troops departed Angola. Elections were held and a new constitution approved. Namibia joined the UN. UNAVEM II  -  UN Angola Verification Mission II Mission Dates:  May 1991 through February 1995Context:  Angolan Civil War Outcome:  Elections were held in 1991, but the results were rejected and violence escalated. The mission transitioned to UNAVEM III. UNOSOM I  -  UN Operation in Somalia I Mission Dates:  April 1992 through March 1993Context:  Somali Civil  War Outcome:  The violence in Somalia continued to escalate, making it difficult for UNOSOM I to deliver relief aid. The United States created a second operation, the Unified Task Force (UNITAF), to help UNOSOM I protect and distribute humanitarian aid. In 1993, the UN created UNOSOM II to replace both UNOSOM I and UNITAF. ONUMOZ  -  UN Operations in Mozambique Mission Dates:  December  1992 through December 1994Context:  Conclusion of the Civil War in Mozambique Outcome:  The ceasefire was successful. Mozambiques then government and the major rivals (Mozambican Nation Resistance, or RENAMO) demobilized troops. Those people who were displaced during the war were resettled and elections were held. UNOSOM II  -  UN Operation in Somalia II Mission Dates:  March 1993 through March 1995Context:  Somali Civil War Outcome:  After the Battle of Mogadishu in October 1993, the United States and several Western countries withdrew their troops from UNOSOM II. The UN voted to withdraw UN troops from Somalia after having failed to establish a ceasefire or disarmament. UNOMUR  -  UN Observer Mission Uganda-Rwanda Mission Dates:  June 1993 through September 1994Context:  Fighting between the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF, based in Uganda) and the Rwandan Government Outcome:  The Observer Mission encountered many difficulties in monitoring the border. These were  due to the terrain and the competing Rwandan and Ugandan factions. After the Rwandan genocide, the missions mandate came to an end and it was not renewed. The mission was succeeded instead by UNAMIR, which had already begun its operations in 1993.   UNOMIL  -  UN Observer Mission in Liberia Mission Dates:  September 1993  through September 1997Context:  The First Liberian Civil War Outcome:  UNOMIL was designed to support ongoing efforts by the  Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)  to bring an end to the Liberian Civil War and ensure fair elections. In 1997, elections were held and the mission terminated. The United Nations established a Peacebuilding Support Office in Liberia. Within a few years, the Second Liberian Civil War had broken out. UNAMIR -  UN Assistance Mission for Rwanda Mission Dates:  October 1993  through March 1996Context:  Rwandan Civil War between the RPF and the Rwandan government Outcome:  Due to the restrictive rules of engagement and an unwillingness from Western governments to risk troops in Rwanda, the mission did little to stop the Rwandan genocide (April through June 1994).   Afterward, UNAMIR did  distribute and ensure humanitarian aid. However, the failure to intervene in the genocide overshadows these significant although belated efforts. UNASOG  -  UN Aouzou Strip Observation Group Mission Dates:  May 1994 through June 1994Context:  Conclusion of the territorial dispute (1973-1994) between Chad and Libya over the Aouzou Strip. Outcome:  Both governments signed a declaration agreeing that Libyan troops and the administration had been withdrawn as previously agreed upon. UNAVEM III  -  UN Angola Verification Mission III Mission Dates:  February 1995 through June 1997Context:  Angolas Civil War Outcome:  A government was formed by the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), but all parties continued to import arms. The situation also deteriorated with the involvement of Angola in the Congo Conflict. The mission was followed by MONUA. MONUA  -  UN Observer Mission in Angola Mission Dates:  June 1997 through February 1999Context:  Angolas Civil War Outcome:  Fighting in the civil war resumed and the UN withdrew its troops. At the same time, the UN urged a continuation of humanitarian aid. MINURCA -  UN Mission in the Central African Republic Mission Dates:  April 1998 through February 2000Context:  Signing of the Bangui Accord between rebel forces and the Central African Republics government Outcome:  Dialogue between the parties continued and the peace was maintained. Elections were held in 1999 after several previous attempts. The UN mission withdrew. MINURCA was followed by a UN Peacebuilding Support Office in the Central African Republic. UNOMSIL  -  UN Observer Mission in Sierra Leone Mission Dates:  July 1998 through October 1999Context:  Sierra Leones Civil War (1991-2002) Outcome:  The combatants signed the controversial Lome Peace Agreement. The UN authorized a new mission, UNAMSIL, to replace UNOMSIL. UNAMSIL  -  UN Mission in Sierra Leone Mission Dates:  October 1999 through December 2005Context:  Sierra Leones Civil War (1991-2002) Outcome:  The mission was expanded three times in 2000 and 2001 as the fighting continued. The war ended in December 2002 and  UNAMSIL troops were slowly withdrawn. The mission was followed by the UN Integrated Office for Sierra Leone. This was created to consolidate the peace in Sierra Leone. MONUC  -  UN Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Mission Dates:  November 1999  through May 2010Context:  Conclusion of the  First Congo War   Outcome:  The Second Congo War began in 1998 when Rwanda invaded. It officially ended in 2002, but fighting by various rebel groups continued. In 2010, MONUC was criticized for not intervening to stop mass rapes near one of its stations. The Mission was renamed the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UNMEE -  UN Observer Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea Mission Dates:  June 2000  through July 2008Context:  A ceasefire signed by Ethiopia and Eritrea in their ongoing border dispute. Outcome:  The mission was ended after Eritrea imposed numerous restrictions that prevented an effective operation. MINUCI  -  UN Operation in  Cà ´te dIvoire Mission Dates:  May 2003 through April 2004Context:  Failed implementation of the  Linas-Marcoussis Agreement, which was to end the ongoing conflict in the country. Outcome:  MINUCI was replaced by the UN Operation in Cà ´te dIvoire (UNOCI). UNOCI is ongoing and continues to protect the people in the country and aid the government in disarmament and demobilization of former combatants. ONUB -  UN Operation in  Burundi Mission Dates:  May  2004 through December 2006Context:  Burundian Civil War Outcome:  The missions goal was to restore peace in Burundi and help establish a unified government. Pierre Nkurunziza was sworn in as President of Burundi in August 2005.  Twelve years of midnight-to-dawn curfews were finally lifted on the people of Burundi. MINURCAT -  UN Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad Mission Dates:  September  2007 through December 2010Context:  Ongoing violence in Darfur, eastern Chad, and northeastern Central African Republic Outcome:  The concern for civilian safety amidst activities by armed groups in the region prompted the mission. By the end of the mission, the government of Chad pledged that they would retain responsibility for protecting its citizens. After the termination of the mission, the UN Integrated Peacebuilding Office in the Central African Republic continued efforts to protect the people.   UNMIS  -  UN Mission in Sudan Mission Dates:  March 2005 through July 2011Context:  End of the Second Sudanese Civil War and signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) Outcome:  The CPA between the Sudanese government and the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement (SPLM) was signed, but it did not bring immediate peace. In 2007, the two groups came to another agreement and Northern Sudanese troops withdrew from Southern Sudan.   In July 2011, the Republic of South Sudan was formed as an independent country. The mission was replaced by UN Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS) to continue the peace process and protect civilians. This started immediately and, as of 2017, the mission continues. Sources: United Nations Peacekeeping.  Past Peacekeeping Operations.

Slavery And Its Impact On America - 1541 Words

Every day it is becoming more and more evident that our nation is divided. Despite warnings from prominent historical figures like George Washington, we have created a great fissure in our nation that stretches from Maryland to Kansas. Where we should be one nation, united under our Constitution, we are instead the North and the South. Every day, this fissure grows and spreads, and soon, I fear, it will crack our Unites States in half. The driving force behind this rift is a controversial issue: the institution of slavery. It was initially intended by our founding fathers that slavery be slowly phased out, as even in 1775 our budding nation’s leaders had the common sense and moral compass to see that slavery is wrong. Even the proponents†¦show more content†¦Fitzhugh identifies the success and grandeur of empires such as the Romans and the Ottomans, yet fails to mention what happened to these once-great empires. The Romans, for example, met their demise when they expa nded too far, causing the central power and influence to be spread too thin, causing the empire to destabilize and eventually collapse. The Ottomans met a similar end. These are hardly examples to be building a case to support the institution of slavery. However, Fitzhugh claims that the developed countries that exist successfully without slavery are not representative of how a working system would work in a large republic, such as the United States, and therefore their success is not relevant to the success of liberty and equality. While other developed countries are smaller in terms of geographic area, countries like Austria and England – among others – have approximately the same size of population, all around thirty million citizens. A country like Austria can hardly be described as a â€Å"small community†, which makes the success of its confederation very relevant to us. Today, the United States is the only developed, industrialized nation to still insti tute slavery, which does not reflect well on the integrity of our nation. The idea of liberty and equality is still relatively new to a world that has spent most of its history oppressing the majority, so there will be obstacles, and there will be failures such as

Macdonals Work Force Diversity Free Essays

What diversity means to McDonalds is not only who works within the organisation but goes as far as the customers who they serve. Patricia Sowell Harris, McDonald’s Chief Diversity Officer declares, â€Å"At its simplest, diversity means that your organization reflects the customers you serve and the society in which you operate. But to be effective, it’s more than counting numbers †¦ it’s making those numbers count. We will write a custom essay sample on Macdonals Work Force Diversity or any similar topic only for you Order Now A truly diverse culture means that different views, opinions, experiences, educations, religions, and lifestyles are respected, where everybody is a valued and contributing member of the team, and where actions are led by insights that create success in the business. † While diversity initiatives have assisted many people in their professions and organisations in their venture to succeed, is there another side to the story; is it just a waste of time and money? For some corporations, that may be true. Cultural diversity efforts like cultural awareness could be seen as nothing more than an extravagant scheme that really does nothing to help workers feel like they are truly a part of the organization, but for the organisation to be seen in a positive light from onlookers; although this hardly seems the case for cultural diversity initiatives in McDonalds. The following was taken from the McDonalds website: Minorities and women represent approximately 37 per cent of all McDonald’s franchisees; More than 65 per cent of the applicants in training to become new McDonald’s franchisees are women and minorities. † Serves more than 58 million customers around the world each day †¢ Is the leading global foodservice retailer with more than 32,000 local restaurants in 118 countries †¢ Employs more than 1. 6 million people worldwide – our brand’s best ambassadors are our people †¢ Today, more than 60 perce nt of our global home office and U. S. ompany workforce are of a racial or ethnic minority, or are women †¢ Is widely recognized as a top company for minorities – also a â€Å"Great Place to Work† in more than 30 countries †¢ Ranked one of the Top 20 Global Companies for Leaders by Fortune magazine in 2007 †¢ About 80% of McDonald’s restaurants worldwide are independently owned operated (franchised) by local business men and women (McDonalds corporation www. macdonalds. com as it exists 2/4/11) Around the world, inclusion and diversity at McDonald’s means providing equal opportunities for everyone to ucceed and contribute. We accomplish this in a number of ways, such as the integration of diversity initiatives into our daily business practices, a strong diversity education curriculum, employee business networks and external partnerships with minority organizations. Jan states â€Å"I’m proud of our industry-leading Global Inclusion and Intercultural Management team which has successfully driven our efforts to have diversity among our employees, franchisees and suppliers across the globe. Jan Fields, President, McDonald’s USA With more than 32,000 restaurants in 118 countries, McDonald’s carries a new meaning to the word diversity, bringing diversity and even change to the menus at every community it touches. Around the world, diversity at McDonald’s means providing equal opportunities for everyone to succeed and contribute. They accomplish this in a number of ways, such as bring forth diversity initiatives into their daily business practices, a strong diverse education curriculum, employee business networks and partnerships with minority organisations. To reinforce the diverse culture today, more than 60 per cent of the workforces are of a racial or ethnic minority, or are women. Inclusion and Diversity also plays an important role for the leaders of McDonalds in the future. Our management team provides regular updates on the progress in this area so they are constantly evaluating the performance to make sure they have strong diverse culture, including gender, ethnicity and nationality. In addition, McDonalds has the largest number of minority and women franchise owners in the fast food industry. The National Black McDonald’s Owner/Operator Association can be considered most successful African American business organizations in the nation, and the Hispanic franchisees fund the largest scholarship program for Hispanic high school students entering college. Furthermore McDonalds suppliers are equally diverse. On average McDonald’s spend $4 billion per year on food, paper packaging, restaurant operating supplies, uniforms and toys from minority and women-owned businesses says Patricia Sowell Harris, McDonald’s Chief Diversity Officer So whether it’s their franchisees, suppliers, or employees, their commitment to inclusion and diversity has helped make McDonald’s the company they’re today. Most importantly, this commitment allows the fast food chain to ensure that their restaurants and business reflect the customer in which is extensively diverse. How to cite Macdonals Work Force Diversity, Papers

Madness in Hamlet free essay sample

The theme of madness in Hamlet has been a widely popular topic in the discussion of the play by both critics and readers alike. Prince Hamlet, in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, is not mad, in terms of sanity. However, he is very mad, in terms of anger, at many of the people that surround him. Hamlet is mainly mad at Gertrude her mother and, most of all Claudius. Although he is extremely angry with Claudius and his own whole situation of his father being murdered; his mother marrying his father’s murderer; and his lady friend not talking to him, Hamlet remains sane in order to carry out his plan of revenge. The madness that has appeared to grip Hamlet is an act played out by him. In order to accomplish that act of revenge on his uncle, Hamlet must have pretended to be mad so that the people of the court would not look upon him with suspicion. We will write a custom essay sample on Madness in Hamlet or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In this play the tragic hero Hamlets contemplates his own concept of moral judgment and in the process, maybe considered mad. Points that suggest that Hamlet is actually insane are scattered throughout the play but many of these are court’s impression of Hamlet. The impression of the court is a false impression because Hamlet has made the members of the court think that he is mad so that he may carry out his master plan. Hamlet is a slyer and more deceptive character than most critics give credit. All of the evidence that points to Hamlet being mad is just a cover for Hamlet in the grand scheme that he has placed together. Hamlet’s appearance of being â€Å" ungartered† (Act 2, Sc 1 . 77), as well as his strange words and phrases are just a disguise. He succeeds in his convincing of the people that he is mad because Polonius, as well as the rest of the court, speaks on his strange behavior. Hamlet’s plan could then be carried out if he was not seen as a threat to the crown. It is interesting to note other characters in the play acting mad. One is Leartes. Unlike Hamlet, Laertes has developed a different kind of madness, a madness that is controlled by revenge. When Laertes is talking to Claudius, Laertes gets so much revenge building up inside him against Hamlet that Laertes now wants to â€Å"cut his throat† Act 4, Sc 7, 125). Laertes’ behavior is caused by the sudden death of his father who was without a due ceremony, and his sister who has been driven mad, has contributed to the madness that is being built up inside Laertes. This madness grows even stronger when Claudius promises â€Å"no wind of blame† (Act 4, Sc 7, 66), when Hamlet kills Hamlet. Claudius turns Laertes into a savage beast to avenge for his father’s death, perhaps this is what Claudius has planned all along. Laertes has a form of madness that is escalating because Laertes knows that he has the capabilities and motivation to act on what he believes on. Ophelia on the other hand, had a unique form of madness unlike Hamlet’s and Laertes’ because it is a mixture of love and hate. An example of hate is when she sings about a â€Å"baker’s daughter† (Act 4, Sc. 5. 42). Ophelia is referring to the way her father used to treat her before the tragic incident of his death. A love with her madness is when she speaks about the vents on â€Å"valentine’s day (Act 4, Sc. 5. 48). When Ophelia speaks about Valentine’s Day, she is referring to the event of romance that she was denied. Ophelia’s madness is brought on by her lack of being able to demonstrate any maturity in trying to cope with her losses and in return can only inflict her madness on the court. Hamlet immediately stresses that his madness is a mask put upon him by himself when he stated, â€Å"†¦. to put an antic disposition on† (Act 1, Sc. 5. 72). This means that Hamlet was going to put on an appearance of being mad. He admitted to himself that he was not mad by saying this and that he was only going to pretend to be mad. If Hamlet openly admits his true intentions to himself, we must trust that his actions are part of his plan. Although, many things lead us to believe that Hamlet was actually mad, he says his behavior is intentional, and there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise. We can look at his actions and assume that he is mad, but the only real proof of his sanity is his own statement. Hamlet directly tells the readers that he is only pretending to be crazy. Therefore, all the evidence that points to Hamlets as being crazy is unreliable, because his actions are pretended. Hamlet gives the audience the appearance that he is hesitant to kill Claudius for many reasons. These reasons include moral issues, religious issues, and depression; yet, Hamlet waits because he chooses to do so. Hamlet gives proof of his intention to wait when he says, â€Å"The time is out of joint; O cursed spite that ever I was born to set it right† (Act 1 Sc 5. 189-190). He is saying that the time to take revenge was not immediately after the murder. Hamlet, therefore, pretends to be mad, in order to maintain safety while he waits for the right time to strike. Although Hamlet manages to convince the court that he is unstable long enough so that he may avoid being killed while formulating his plan of revenge, Claudius becomes suspicious of his behavior. Even Claudius questions Hamlet’s supposed madness. Claudius states,† Was not like madness. There is something in his soul† (Act 3, Sc1. 172). This statement proves that someone besides Hamlet realizes that he is not actually mad, but rather, there is method to his mayhem. Near the end of the play, Hamlet, again, reveals his plan of disguise. This time, however, he reveals his plan to Gertrude when he says, â€Å"That I essentially am not in madness, but mad in craft† (Act 3. Sc4. 187-188). This repetition of his plan proves that Hamlet was truly not mad but just so precise and specific in planning every detail of his elaborate scheme that he seemed mad to the people in the court. He was so â€Å"Mad in craft† that he went to the extremes in executing his plan of revenge. Hamlet was so furious with Claudius, that he engulfed himself in his plan and carried it out right down to the words he spoke and every little action he did. In conclusion, Hamlet avoids allowing everyone know that he is planning hostile actions against Claudius. Even though Claudius and Polonius suspect that Hamlet knows the truth behind the murder of King Hamlet, Hamlet is able to disguise his intentions of revenge long enough so that he may wait for the right time to strike. The only proof that Hamlet is actually insane comes in the form of his actions and speech. Now, if Hamlet specifically says that his actions and speech is just a disguise, can they be used as evidence that he is unstable? Certainly not. Hamlet’s madness was an act; a disguise to draw attention away from his vengeful plan to murder Claudius for enough time to allow Hamlet to wait for the right time to strike. Hamlet must wait for the right time to act and plan his revenge, so, what better way to reduce his threat to Claudius than to make everyone believe that he had lost his mind. Works cited Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces.