The Human Rights Treaty Obligations of Peacekeepers

Do States, through their military forces, have legal obligations under human rights treaties towards the local civilian population during UN-mandated peace operations? It is frequently claimed that it is unrealistic to require compliance with human rights treaties in peace operations, and this has led to an unwillingness to hold States accountable for human rights violations. In this book, Kjetil Larsen criticises this position by addressing the arguments against the applicability of human rights treaties and demonstrating that compliance with the treaties is unrealistic only if one takes an 'all or nothing' approach to them. He outlines a coherent and more flexible approach which distinguishes clearly between positive and negative obligations and makes treaty compliance more realistic. His proposals for the application of human rights treaties would also strengthen the legal framework for human rights protection in peace operations without posing any unrealistic obligations on the military forces.

• Examines a wide spectre of legal and policy arguments for why human rights treaties should or should not apply to peace operations, thereby giving the whole picture and demonstrating how questions are interrelated
• Combines legal and pragmatic perspectives, allowing readers to operationalise and apply the offered views
• Analyses the legal impact of the concern that it is unrealistic to require compliance with human rights treaties in peace operations and provides realistic tools for strengthening the legal human rights framework and the accountability mechanisms in peace operations