Decision making is a process whereby decision makers make based on their self-belief and biasness on a certain extent. Hermann (cited Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. 1991) also noted that, in response to crisis or tough situation, authority and decision-making activities shift to higher levels of a hierarchical structure. This paper will talk about the different decisions making approaches such as unitary and pluralist approaches that both UN and General Dallaire will unknowingly use as well as the hierarchical system that Dallaire has to go through and the repercussions that followed the decisions he made. General Dallaire who has no war experience together with his deputy was to lead the UN peacekeeping operation that was to prevent the mass …show more content…
Dallaire used the unitary approach on many occasions. Together with his team, their role was to access and make recommendations to the UN regarding the Rwanda situation. The UN rightly asked for effective ways to solve the problem. Seemingly, it looked like Dallaire had legitimate powers and resources. However, UN's hierarchical system did not give Dallaire the authority and rights that he as a Lieutenant-General should rightfully have. Therefore many of Dallaire’s requests to prevent the genocide were rejected by the UN. All the rejections can be linked with the "Bureaucratic model” in decision making process. Hansen, H. (2011) suggests that the result of any decision made would be a repetitive kind and it will be probable from the existing of a management rule. Dallaire drafted a report on requesting 2500 troops to handle the situation but the report has to go through a chain of command. From DPKO leadership to UN secretary general then eventually to the Security Council for approval, but only after a vote for it to be approved. This led to a case of UN not displaying urgency and lack of commitment when Dallaire reminded them that he needed troops as soon as possible to deal with the situation. We can see Dallaire was under domination …show more content…
” Pluralist approach would include something we call the "garbage-can" model. Cohen, M.D., March, J.D. and Olsen, J.P(cited Hansen, H 2011) defines that the Garbage-can model is a combination of possible solutions and a string of problems all mixed together for a decision. Hayes, S. L., & McGee, P. B. (1998) also agreed that garbage-can are issues, feelings, problems and opportunities tossed together for a decision. However the problem and solution may not be related and therefore ultimately the decision might not solve the problem but create others. Dallaire came up with decisions that were forced for solutions, solutions that he did not wanted to come up with. He faced a large number of unresolved issues or problems which eventually still went unsolved and led to the genocide. Driver et al (cited Eberlin, R. J., & Tatum, B. C 2008) show that individuals who look for minimal amount of information or resources can be categorized as "satisfiers. Peacekeeping in the UN was under the charge of DKPO. Dallaire knew he needed to win over the Security Council’s approval, but he could only recommend a solution that was small and inexpensive due to budgetary concerns. Being restricted and limited to the criteria, although Dallaire wanted a much larger peacekeeping force but
Genocide is a pressing issue with a multitude of questions and debates surrounding it. It is the opinion of many people that the United Nations should not get involved with or try to stop ongoing genocide because of costs or impositions on the rights of a country, but what about the rights of an individual? The UN should get involved in human rights crimes that may lead to genocide to prevent millions of deaths, save money on humanitarian aid and clean up, and fulfill their responsibilities to stop such crimes. It is preferable to stop genocide before it occurs through diplomacy, but if necessary, military force may be used as a last resort. Navi Pillay, Human Rights High Commissioner, stated, “Concerted efforts by the international community at critical moments in time could prevent the escalation of violence into genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing.”
"Peacekeeping and Peacemaking." Reading and Remembrance . N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Jan. 2014. . (tags: none | edit tags)
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
Canada’s foreign policy at the time with regards to Rwanda must be analyzed through a realist lens, as Canada’s lack of support was brought about out of self interest. Realists consider states to be the main actors within the anarchic international system. These states are concerned with their own security, only pursue their own national interests, and are in a constant battle for power. In focusing on power and self interests realists are skeptic of ethical norms and ethical relations (Soomo Publishing, 2011). This realist reaction to the Rwandan genocide can be seen throughout the entire genocide. For example, Canada, as well as the rest of the international community ignored Romeo Dallaire and his frequent attempts to warn nations about the impeding violence, through means such as the Genocide Fax, which was sent in January 1994, over four months before the genocide officially began (Kuperman, 2001). David Kilgour, a Canadian member of parliament echoed this opinion in noting that Canadian troops were not released from other missions to join the existing peacekeeping force until the largest amount of deaths had already occurred. He goes as far as questioning
Wheeler, Nicholas J. ‘Pluralist or Solidarist Conceptions of International Society: Bull and Vincent on Humanitarian Intervention’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies 21,3 (1992)
Percival, Valerie, and Thomas Homer-Dixon. "Getting Rwanda wrong. (genocide in Rwanda)." Saturday Night. v110. n7 (Sept 1995): p47(3). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. K12 Trial Site. 12 Apr. 2010 .
Current military leadership should comprehend the nature of war in which they are engaged within a given political frame in order to develop plans that are coherent with the desired political end state. According to Clausewitz, war is an act of politics that forces an enemy to comply with certain conditions or to destroy him through the use of violence. A nation determines its vital interests, which drives national strategy to obtain or protect those interests. A country achieves those goals though the execution of one of the four elements of power, which are diplomatic, informational, military and economical means. The use of military force...
Various schools of thought exist as to why genocide continues at this deplorable rate and what must be done in order to uphold our promise. There are those who believe it is inaction by the international community which allows for massacres and tragedies to occur - equating apathy or neutrality with complicity to evil. Although other nations may play a part in the solution to genocide, the absolute reliance on others is part of the problem. No one nation or group of nations can be given such a respo...
In the view of global security,(2011) The military decision making process abbreviated as MDMP is a planning model that establishes procedures for analyzing a mission, developing and comparing courses of action(COA) that are best suited to accomplish the higher commander’s intention and mission. The MDMP comprise of seven stages and each stage depends on the previous step to produce its own output. This means that a mistake in the early stage will affect all the other stages that follow. These steps include:
World War I was a conflict that claimed over 10 million peoples’ lives, ravaged all of Europe and engineered modern warfare, as it is know today. The Great War has been scrutinized and examined through many complex theories in order to understand how such a conflict escalated to one of the most epic wars in history. This essay, like many works before it, looks to examine WWI and determine its causes through two distinct levels of analysis, individual and systemic. The individual level of analysis locates the cause of conflicts in individual leaders or decision makers within a particular country, focusing on the characteristics of human decision-making. The systemic level of analysis explains the causation of a conflict from a system wide level that includes all states, taking in to account the distribution of power and the interaction of states in the international system.
Kent, Randolph and Mackinlay, John. May/June 1997. “International Responses to Complex Emergencies: Why a new approach is needed?” NATO Review, 27-29.
In high sit con situation, the low LPC (task-motivated) focus on situation control in their ability to alleviate the epidemic of a burden or disease that pose threats to the world or nations (NMSU, n.d.). These leaders look at the details alignment when considering what avenues are needed to take control of gaining influence over the situation (NMSU, n.d.; The Art of Good Leadership, n.d.). While, the individual members states under Fiedler’s Contingency Model could be considered low sit con situations that of low LPC in where they desire or responsible for managing the chaos (NSMU, n.d.). The United Nations state members’ have more control over their country through their strong position power to command the action they need to be done to the subordinates that of the federal, states, local organizations, and the health departments (NMSU, n.d.). As these tasks motivated low LPC requires task completion to push agenda using their autocratic power (NMSU,
1. As far as peace keeping methods go, the reputation of the United Nations is very pitiable. This is not only because they have not been doing their job to it’s fullest extent, but also because the member states on the security council haven’t given the UN the power it needs if it is to be a successful force in peace keeping methods.
Ripeness and readiness are good theory’s to explain why conflicts ends. They both show how multiple factors come into play to end a conflict. “Ripeness is not sudden, but rather a complex process of transformations in the situation, shifts in public attitudes and new perceptions and visions among decision-makers” (Rambotham, 2011: 180). The Oslo negotiations and the peace process are good examples of the readiness theory and its ease explaining the resolution of these conflicts. The Cambodian conflict poses more difficulty being explained through ripeness. When conflicts are multilateral poses a challenge to readiness theory. Adapting readiness theory
Fifty-one countries established the United Nations also known as the UN on October 24, 1945 with the intentions of preserving peace through international cooperation and collective security. Over the years the UN has grown in numbers to include 185 countries, thus making the organization and its family of agencies the largest in an effort to promote world stability. Since 1954 the UN and its organizations have received the Nobel Peace Prize on 5 separate occasions. The first in 1954 awarded to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, for its assistance to refugees, and finally in 1988 to the United Nations Peace-keeping Forces, for its peace-keeping operations. As you can see, the United Nations efforts have not gone without notice.