Introduction

Even though peacekeeping operations are not mentioned in the United Nations (UN) Charter, peacekeeping has long been an integral and highly visible part of the UN's responsibilities, especially after the shift from observer missions to classic peacekeeping operations starting with the formation of the UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) in the Middle East. From 1948 through early 2025, the UN undertook 73 missions globally, with 12 still active as of 2025. During the Cold War, UN peacekeeping missions had a vast impact on the member-states and the societies in which the missions \were hosted and also on the states that contributed troops to the operations.1 Consequently, UN peacekeeping is an important subject of study for scholars of the Cold War.The end of the Cold War gave rise to suggestions that peacekeeping had become increasingly ineffective and redundant, with costs far outweighing benefits.2 Peacekeeping operations after 1991 displayed some continuities and some discontinuities with practices during the Cold War, but the global context was very different.3 The complexity of the peacekeeping environment, the emergence of a growing number of international actors in general peacekeeping such as non-governmental organizations, regional organizations, and other non-state actors revealed previously unnoticed gaps between peacekeeping theories on the one hand and experiential lessons on the other. Scholars in the field of the history of international organizations came closest to resolving these issues in the study of peacekeeping. Most of their analyses, however, were too narrowly focused on the possibilities and successes of cooperation, transnational connections, and institutions, norms, and regimes, and they neglected the interplay among various actors.The international conflicts and crises that gave rise to peacekeeping operations during the Cold War were often connected to the process of decolonization.4 After the UN failed to gain support for establishing its own military forces in 1946, the setting up and implementation of peacekeeping operations reflected the approaches of (1) the permanent members of the UN Security Council, (2) the majority of member-states of the UN General Assembly, and (3) influential non-governmental actors. A comprehensive assessment of UN peacekeeping operations during the Cold War would require integrating relevant national, regional, international, and transnational perspectives. Studies evaluating mission efficiency, attitudes toward peacekeeping operations among the local populations, the contribution of peacekeeping to conflict resolution, and the position of the UN in regional conflicts have been illuminating but have not provided the wider coverage that is needed.5 Scholars need to look in depth at a wide range of cases, formats, objectives, operational actions, and participants—from the first observer missions of the 1940s, to five peacekeeping operations in the 1950s, six in the 1960s, three in the 1970s, and a surge of operations in the 1980s, as well as failed efforts to establish meaningful initiatives in other cases. Such a study could provide a more complete picture of international relations during the Cold War.6The large literature on UN peacekeeping has looked at operational concerns, quantitative and qualitative analyses of the achievements (or lack thereof) of particular missions, and the design of UN peacekeeping missions in general.7 After the Cold War, the expansion of UN peacekeeping in both scope and size generated newer debates in the field, focused on the abuse of power by peacekeepers, conflict-related violence, and the ethics of peacekeeping related to questions of humanitarian intervention and the so-called Responsibility to Protect.8 Efforts to treat peacekeepers as political actors meant that the major themes in peacekeeping literature increasingly overlapped with the concerns of scholarship on international relations (IR) and international security. Studies of peacekeeping also dealt with peacekeeping operations undertaken outside UN auspices.9 These debates did not explicitly deal with the history of peacekeeping operations and were rarely historically grounded. Journals devoted to the study of peacekeeping claimed to reflect issues in “international relations, military studies, peace and conflict studies, international law and development studies” but not in history, not even in military history.10A few in-depth studies have tracked the “evolution” of UN peacekeeping but have generally not gone beyond notions of “collective security.”11 The most valuable studies have analyzed the failure of certain peacekeeping missions and the structural problems within the UN that hindered operations both large and small.12 Research on peacekeeping has also featured probability studies that explore correlations between the presence of peacekeeping operations and the absence of conflict or the stability and durability of negotiated settlements.13By providing a survey of peacekeeping approaches and policies during the Cold War based on thorough research in archives and memoirs, this special forum sheds light on the history of international relations during the latter half of the 20th century. The two phases of UN peacekeeping—first-generation and second-generation peacekeeping—coincide with the Cold War (1948-1991) and the post-Cold War period.14 The focus here is on the first phase. Nevertheless, the issues that arise here regarding the problems, benefits, and limitations of peacekeeping are also relevant to the post-Cold War period. Scholars have examined the Cold War in conjunction with other global processes such as decolonization, the development of international organizations, the advent of globalization, and the advances in technology that paved the way for the digital age.15 Solid historical research on the development of UN peacekeeping operations during the Cold War further enriches this scholarship.16 Comparative surveys of national contributions along with diplomatic and military microhistories highlight the internal workings of peacekeeping missions. Historical research has always been a key element in the field of international relations, but new techniques in international history and IR can be applied well to studies of the early decades of UN peacekeeping.17The special forum we have put together here expands our knowledge of specific operations, of single cases of institutional long-term crisis management, and of national approaches to UN peacekeeping. The forum also suggests newly relevant aspects in historical research of UN peacekeeping, often emanating from specific national narratives of how peacekeeping was conducted or received. The articles together indicate how comparative studies of peacekeeping operations should be undertaken by scholars of international history. The articles move from the late 1940s and 1950s into the early 1990s, in keeping with the transition from first-generation to second-generation peacekeeping. Nicolas Blarel discusses India's participation in the UN Emergency Force (UNEF I) in Gaza from 1956 to 1967, tracing the evolution in India's motivations to contribute to UN peacekeeping efforts over time. Blarel's analysis illustrates how international, regional, and domestic factors affected Indian leaders’ decisions to participate and, eventually, withdraw from peacekeeping efforts. Jovan Čavoški approaches the case of UNEF I from another angle, that of the non-aligned European country Yugoslavia, including its ties with India. Using newly declassified documents from Serbia and India, Čavoški follows the history of the establishment of the peacekeeping mission in the Sinai in 1957 and its first duties. His article shows how nonaligned countries supported one of their allies, Egypt, inside the new framework of UN peacekeeping. Unto Vesa shifts the focus to the role of Finland as a peacekeeper and later a “peace enforcer,” including deployments in UNEF I and the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) and the impact of the dramatic changes in global politics in 1989-1990. Kyoko Hatekeyama discusses how Japan's reluctance to play a substantial role in military affairs remained unchanged even within the framework of UN peacekeeping throughout the Cold War. Discussing the cases in Cambodia and East Timor, she shows how Japan's attitude toward peacekeeping changed substantially after 1991, reflecting a change in the nature and context of missions in the region.This special forum is intended to draw broader attention to a neglected topic, one that is often left solely to studies of international security. The use of historical approaches in the study of peacekeeping can benefit scholars of IR and international security, but it also allows us to gain a better understanding of phases in international history since 1945, contributing to both academic and policy-relevant discussions.Even though Andreas Hilger passed away before this forum appeared, his intellectual vision and genial camaraderie were crucial in shaping it. He will be sorely missed by all who knew him and had the honor of working with him.