Demokratisk fred : Resultatet av FN-interventioner ur ett demokratiskt perspektiv

Sammanfattning: The UN was established after the Second World War. The organization’s primary goal was to maintain peace among all nations. When the UN intervenes in other states affairs, it is violat-ing the principles it is set to defend, principles of non-intervention and respect for sover-eignty. The outcome from such interventions is very important, a result that can legitimize the action. It is important that interventions give birth to democratic processes and respect for human rights, values that constitute the organisation. Why some countries go to war and others don’t is hard to say but one thing can be said about war – democratic states don’t wage war against each other. Thus, democracy would be a guarantee for mutual peace among all nations. The purpose of this essay is to find out if the prospects for democracy, as result of UN-interventions, were fulfilled. Did the interventions created conditions for democracy in the future. • Did the interventions result in a democratic process? • Is there something special in comment for countries with a similar democratic develop-ment? • Can the current situation legitimize the actions? Cease studies, comparisons between intensions of democracy and the current situation, is one way to find an answer to the question mentioned above and will correspond to the purpose of this essay. In order to see the whole picture I will use different criteria to define democracy. Democracy and UN-interventions (Karlstad University Press 2002), a disputation by Andreas Andersson, will be my starting point. He states that democracy is an aspect of interventions that many countries consider as most relevant for commitment and legitimacy. Not one of the countries can be called a democracy today and the situation for the people has not improved much. The result of the intervention can not give legitimacy to the action. The UN-interventions has consolidated the situation more than creating the necessary conditions for democracy. I could not through my research find anything specific that does unite or separate some of the cases. The only thing the countries of my essay have in comment is the lack of success from the UN-interventions, from a democratic point of view. The countries are facing many problems that disturb the democratic transition. Discrimination is one obstacle, there can not be a democracy when half of the population is being excluded from the political arena. Illiteracy and restriction of press freedom is an other problem, the Opposition can not reach out to people by newspapers, an important channel for exchange of opinions. Democracy in all areas of the community is a way to secure peace and should be a priority even for already democratic states. The next question to be answered, an invitation to further research, is: What do democratic states do in order to deepen and consolidate democracy within their own society?