In the early 1990s, the United Nations achieved in Cambodia an outcome that has been promoted as an important and rare peacekeeping success. The United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia ... Show moreIn the early 1990s, the United Nations achieved in Cambodia an outcome that has been promoted as an important and rare peacekeeping success. The United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) was a key experiment in the laboratory of post-Cold War peacekeeping. Although UNTAC was confronted with one major spoiler party, the Khmer Rouge, the mission’s leadership supposedly resisted venturing into peace enforcement and succeeded in achieving the mission’s end goal of holding democratic elections in May 1993. However, UNTAC’s outcome has been all too readily interpreted in the light of the peacekeeping failures in the former Yugoslavia and Somalia. Using newly declassified documents, this study breaks with the traditional narrative that ascribes the causes for “success” in Cambodia to a strict adherence to the traditional peacekeeping principles. It reveals that under the imperative of turning the mission into a success, and paradoxically, saving the credibility of UN peacekeeping itself, UNTAC eventually violated the core principle of impartiality by forging an alliance with the government faction against the Khmer Rouge. The historical analysis thereby demonstrates that the theoretical and legalistic distinction between peacekeeping and peace enforcement has long distorted a thorough understanding of the true challenges in UN peacekeeping operations. Show less
This thesis focuses on the duty of independence and impartiality for arbitrators. The starting point is unambiguous: an arbitrator should be independent and impartial. Less unambiguous is the... Show moreThis thesis focuses on the duty of independence and impartiality for arbitrators. The starting point is unambiguous: an arbitrator should be independent and impartial. Less unambiguous is the answer to the question of what this duty of arbitral independence and impartiality entails. This thesis aimed to shed light on this (general) research question.The objective of this doctoral research was twofold. On the one hand, the objective was to gain insight into the way in which the duty of arbitral independence and impartiality is interpreted judicially. To this end, it was examined how the duty is interpreted in arbitration legislation, institutional rules, and (arbitral) court rulings. On the other hand, the objective was to shed light on a number of (open) questions related to the scope of the duty. In this respect, it was examined, among other things, who exactly is subject to the duty, how the duty emerges in arbitration legislation and institutional rules, what the duty aims to achieve, the question from when and to when arbitrators must be independent and impartial, and whether the parties can waive the right to an independent and impartial arbitrator. Show less
