How much has peacekeeping, peace enforcement and         humanitarian intervention changed since the 1990s?

         With the end of the Cold War, ethnic, leading to human tragedy in the world's various regions, religious and national conflicts of the outbreak, along with the human rights concept of the second world war after a universal characteristic gain as a result of events have emerged to such as peacekeeping, peace enforcement, and humanitarian interventions. In this context, the establishment of a number of international organizations. For example;  After World War I, to ensure peace and collective security in the League of Nations was founded. But the lack of enforcement power of a strong state and society do not want to have the same rights as their colonial unable to provide peace and caused a larger war. On the other hand, after World War II, the establishment of international organizations such as NATO and the United Nations took this case to a different size. League of Nations, like its predecessors, is not only aimed at peace and security, obtaining a much more comprehensive content; fundamental human rights, gender equality, economic and social rights, showed that it may take an active role in the issue. In this context, the United Nations and NATO, the most important international organizations are in the maintenance of international peace.

         In order to ensure peace, first side to peaceful methods-negotiation, inquiry, with suggestions such as refereeing decisions, but does not bring this solution arises the right to UN intervention.  However, during the cold war, because of the conflict between the US and the Soviet Union, the UN failed to fulfill its function. For example; In 1965, Dominican Republic, to protect their own national interests of the United States to intervene in Latin American and Caribbean States in the event that the policy is implemented. Detect the threat of a US attack will be made to any of the territory of the country as a threat to its own security was defending the idea that the right to intervene to reverse this situation. US, initially being established in response to its own citizens to exert their main purpose is to prevent doing to save the life of the communist regime. On the other hand, the United States for their own interests, in 1989 was found and seized control of here intervention in Panama. Nevertheless, the United Nations has remained silent. This also shows us; that the United Nations can be exploited by powerful actors in the system of sovereign equality within the framework of the treaty. After the end of the Cold War, made peaceful solutions and humanitarian interventions has not been fully successful. It has also been exploited again by powerful actors. In addition, the intervention of economic and social dimensions were generally ignored. In this context, while the UN's mission to prevent conflict usually is not enough to intervene after the conflict ends. For example; in 1993, Rwanda genocide or in 1995, massacre Bosniaks in Srebrenica. This is a little on the subject of the relevant situation about UN General Secretary. That duty to bring the person is supposed to be strictly neutral. But today we look at the national interest of the state can prevent it. For example; America's invasion of Iraq, 7. General Secretary of the UN Kofi Annan to move independently of the UN, such as the US-led movement.

            Or genocide in Rwanda as 1 million people died. In such cases the events need to better analyze. Because you think that intervention or sanctions apply figured it out but you can cause more disaster. For example; the UN, When applied to thousands of Bosnian arms embargo on the Bosnian Serbs killed by severe torture and remained stranded. However, the blockade should be applied on both sides. In this context, we can say that the UN made a strategic mistake in order to protect the peace. On the other hand; the UN in humanitarian intervention economic, political or military intervention can apply. Provide solutions in a number of economic sanctions and political interference with military intervention if it is not right to produce, of course, this is going to harm the state's sovereignty to the fore because the state sovereignty in international law. In addition, the UN currently no army. Only the "blue berets" a unit he called the present. This unit is generally going to the area to appease conflicts. But when it comes to military intervention, is entering the NATO operation. Economic costs are generally preferred due to the air strike is cheaper and the death rate is low. But air strikes are generally more damage can cause death loss and diplomatic issues. For example; in 1999, Kosovo also made humanitarian intervention in the explosive thrown because of the air strikes have seen more harm civilians and cities, with the unconscious intervention as a result of the Chinese Consulate blown-so China briefly in the US has been a diplomatic crisis. However, for this type of incident does not happen, the presence of ground troops in humanitarian intervention is more important to avoid conflicting parties in both for civilians. But it was too much for the size of the financial inability remove the economic burden of a majority of the member states of NATO is very difficult in such a humanitarian intervention prescriptions. Already safety, security and welfare issues in cost management and conflict resolution is a long-term investment plays a very important role. But whatever humanitarian intervention, should be determined by the costs involved and should be applied in a specific humanitarian purposes.In short, international law should not be overlooked. Although the state's prison disposal of war and conflict will judge issuing guilty and sentenced to be present at the international criminal court. On the other hand; that the member states of the common interests is important for human intervention. For example; in Syria, was also a number of attempts to overthrow the Assad regime. However, this situation is not welcome in Russia and Iran and Syria see this situation as a matter of intervention in the internal affairs has prevented humanitarian intervention. However, especially Turkey, Syrian refugees in the country has taken to many countries for humanitarian aid. Create as in refugee camps, aimed to make the necessary assistance.

         In conclusion; from the 1990s until today to keep the peace, humanitarian intervention, though different issues such as implementation and operation result is always the same. Intermediate with successful results would be more accurate to say that something not changed much. Solution Instead of producing these international organizations have failed to save the day go beyond just calms solution. Failed to produce any solution for later. For Example; Egypt, Libya, Iraq etc. still has not produced solutions in the country, on the contrary, the system has always been exploited and abused by powerful actors.