IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/chnrpt/v49y2013i2p205-226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indian and Chinese Engagement in UN Complex Peacekeeping Operations: A Comparative Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Yeshi Choedon

Abstract

There were great differences between Indian and Chinese positions on the UN peacekeeping operations during the Cold War. India played a pioneering role both in the conceptualisation and consolidation of the peacekeeping mechanism. On the other hand, China vehemently opposed the UN peacekeeping operation as a tool of imperialism even after joining the United Nations in 1971. Both India and China are apprehensive of motivation of the Western enthusiasm for complex peacekeeping operations of the post-Cold War and both expressed strong reservation on number of issues arising from them. As they do not want to be marginalised hence, despite their reservations, they individually participated actively in the operations with the intention of making a difference through participation. The differences in their participation are partly due to vast experience and confidence of India and partly due to hesitancy of China to engage in new terrain. They have taken similar positions to strengthen UN peacekeeping such as advocating for stronger financial resources, participation of the troop contributing countries in the decision-making process, favouring standby forces, opposing a selective approach and effective training of peacekeepers. Their participation in peacekeeping operations is no longer just a means to prevent Western powers from misusing peacekeeping operations. Different motives and incentives appear to be driving India and China’s participation in the peacekeeping operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Yeshi Choedon, 2013. "Indian and Chinese Engagement in UN Complex Peacekeeping Operations: A Comparative Perspective," China Report, , vol. 49(2), pages 205-226, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:chnrpt:v:49:y:2013:i:2:p:205-226
    DOI: 10.1177/0009445513491525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0009445513491525
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0009445513491525?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:chnrpt:v:49:y:2013:i:2:p:205-226. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.