Legal Powers of the United Nations Security Council in Iraq-Kuwait Situation - Essay Example

Research Diary: Legal powers of the United Nations Security Council in Iraq-Kuwait Situation Name: Professors’ Name: Class No: Date: I have to consider the fact that Iraq has been and still is an issue that has dogged the world for a very long time. What is strange about the case is that at the beginning the so-called police of the world were backing Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war; Iran was then accused of trying to spread fundamental Islamic Policies through out the Middle East, and the West considered that as a threat to its ambitions in the Middle East. They then subcontracted Saddam to help them fight the Iranian influence. This I discovered was a clear violation of the rules that govern the relationship between nations especially when it comes to conflict. There are other means of dealing with such differences as stated in Chapter V Article 41 of the UN Charter. What was ironic was the fact that when Iraq went ahead and attacked Kuwait, she became abandoned by the same people who had supported her previously and they had sacrificed a lot more than any one of them had, after all one can’t compare personal sacrifices with fiscal sacrifices. The reason why I chose this topic is because to begin with, the atrocities that were committed during the two wars couldn’t be blamed on only one country. Kuwait helped fund the Iraq war machine. The UNSC also did the same and also helped Iraq acquire WMDs that were used in the said conflict. Secondly the abandonment of Iraq after the war was uncalled for. It was unexpected and this prompted a reaction from the Iraq government. The UNSC who had helped equip Iraq knew the capability of the country but still neglected this fact. In my opinion, the UNSC could have done a lot more to control the situation but failed to do so; it had faced a lot of criticism because of the role it had played during the Iraq-Iran war - it needed to make an example of Iraq to the world. Therefore the powers of the UNSC under the Charter were violated, twisted and turned, to suit the needs of a few within the UNSC. I chose the topic because I wanted to establish the link between the atrocities committed between the two wars in the Middle East to the abuse of power by the UN Security Council. Before the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq a number of issues had to be considered. To begin with, the Republic of Iraq had, since the 1980s, had cordial relationship with the state of Kuwait. The relationship had seen Kuwait heavily supporting Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war between 1980 and 1988. The UNSC had also turned a blind eye during this conflict of which Iraq was accused of using Weapons of Mass Destruction on civilian population and it also supported Saddam during the same war. The Security Council was still composed of the same five permanent members yet none sought redress for the Iranian State. Kuwait on the other hand was doing well due its oil resources but a conflict had existed, though mildly as to the issues of Kuwait being part of Iraq curved out due to British influence and colonization. Then there was the issue of resources; it was claimed that Iraq owed Kuwait a lot because of the role that Kuwait played in support of Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war and despite several attempts to come to an understanding nothing was agreed. Therefore there were tensions building between the two states. The 8- year conflict had destroyed the economy of Iraq because she had to pay the accumulated debt. According to scholars, the state of Kuwait was trying hard to ensure that Iraq was facing a tough time, with the thought that eventually they would bow to pressure therefore succumbing to the demands of the wealthier state of Kuwait. Kuwait was at this point the antagonist, and because of her economic ability and might they frustrated all the efforts Iraq tried to make and regain stability. This was therefore reason enough for an unstable Iraq to invade Kuwait. Considering the military might of the larger Iraq then the invasion was long overdue. The years that followed and the various negotiations that took place clearly placed Iraq in a confused position; the people of Iraq were clearly disgruntled because of the slow economic growth despite the vast amount of oil resources. Iraq also after presenting its case to the USA, then a hegemony, thought that the USA had given her the green light to protect her national interests. What followed was the invasion of Kuwait. In a space of seven months the state of Kuwait had been over run by the Iraq forces. What followed the invasion of Iraq is the subject of this paper. My main argument in the paper follows a number of issues: first is the fact that the United Nations Security Council knew of the engagement prior to the actual event. An Iraq delegation went to the white house and justified to them the need for the Iraq government to defend its interest. This was because of the relationship that existed between the two states:USA had helped fund and equip the Iraqi forces against the Iranians. The USA therefore knew the capabilities of the Iraq forces and did nothing to take charge of the situation. Article 24 of Chapter Five of the UN Charter gives the Security Council “key responsibility for the preservation of international peace and security” and demands that the Security Council should act in accordance with the UN's purposes and principles. In other words, the Security Council can’t be seen to be self serving in the name of preserving world peace. This in mind then it is clear that the Security Council has in more than one occasion acted in defiance of its own code; it is a case of doing what I say and not what I do all in the name of power and in the case of Iraq oil. It is a fact that the United Nations Security Council at the time of the invasion of Kuwait was aware of Iraq intentions. Secondly, considering the previous negligence of the Council, they had to make an example of someone and who else than the one who has been accused of using WMDs in the 1980’s, Iraq. Preservation of peace should happen without discrimination; in this case a situation had presented itself and therefore the UNSC took the opportunity to punish and isolate Iraq even though they knew the consequences of such an action. Iraq had the right to defend itself; had she been advised to step back she would have done so. Nonetheless Iraq had every right to invade Kuwait considering all the sacrifices that Iraq had made for the prosperity of Kuwait. Therefore if the Security Council was aware of what was to follow, they had evidence that proved that Iraq troops were amassing near the Kuwait border, what actions did they take to protect world peace and security according to Article 24 of the Charter? What did they do to protect the rights and lives of the Kuwait people? Nothing, Iraq had seven months to over run Kuwait and loot all they could in the name of economic freedom. In my research, Article 39 of the UN Charter states that the Security Council shall establish the existence of any threat to the peace; unfortunately it doesn’t see itself as one of the main source of conflict and war in the world look at the first and second Gulf wars, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations; after consulting the UN body that has in more than one occasion been ignored on matters of security, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security. Articles 41 and 42 state respectively that the Security Council may decide what actions are to be taken not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give product to its decisions, and it may call upon the members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may involve the complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations and should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of members of the United Nations. This means that the action to be taken against any member of the international community should be reached through a consensus of all the members of the international community. But unfortunately not all members are equal hence the Security Council. Use of force has been established as a last resort in case a defiant member refuses to comply with the resolutions adopted by the UN Security Council; in this case the Security Council is taken to represent the rest of the world. But use of force is contradictory to the preservation of world peace; going to war is against the idea behind the formation of the UN and consequently the principle of maintaining world peace and security. Unfortunately for the State of Iraq, there were other intentions behind the portrayed actions of the UN Security Council. The process of reaching a resolution is supposed to be free and fair after a lot of consultations and review of the whole situation. Unfortunately for the adoption of resolution 678 (1990) that re affirmed all the other passed resolutions, 660 (1990) to 677 (1990) that had clearly identified Iraq as the antagonist a lot of back door agreements were reached. Some states were promised financial benefits while others were threatened on the same. The result meant that the USA as the head of the council had the right to attack Iraq in the name of restoring peace. The use of backhand tactics by the hegemony at the time meant that there was nothing the other members could have done. The decision can’t be believed to have been unanimous because the Security Council had been under a lot of criticism and therefore Iraq proved to be a good scape-goat. What followed was the use of force against Iraq further damaging her economy and putting her people in peril. As said above the idea behind the formation of the UN was peace; the invasion of Iraq by the allied forces meant that the action was justified. Unfortunately the people who suffered were the civilians who the Charter has sworn to protect. The economic sanctions and the subsequent actions against the State of Iraq further plunged the country into turmoil and a friend became an enemy. This is attributed to the change of times. The Cold War had ended putting the USA as the only power in the world - a hegemony. To show that times had changed they used Iraq as an example and in the process ended up perpetrating suffering through out the state of Iraq through various means. In my writing I relied on several factors in getting and gaining information. These factors have played a major role in my essay. First are the materials I used to get information; books, articles, journals, website and the lecture tapes at the university library. Of course books were of precedence because they usually take a point and shed light on it by showing others point of views in comparison to that view and give a review and a critique on it. Whereas almost articles as well as journals just emphasis the author’s opinions. Being an Arab also had a lot of influence on my research; Arabic books and articles took a precedence place in my essay. The reasons behind that were, of course the lack of legal language also skills in my situation. The essay approximately was taken a big emphasis on the Middle East which seemed useful because a number of issues in the region are interrelated. Unfortunately I have not gained as much as I expected from the Arabic literature; most have focused on the Arab-Israeli conflict instead as well as the theory that the Arab region is targeted by Western civilization. I also discovered that a lot of information is biased against the role that Iraq played during the Invasion of Kuwait therefore reading it requires that I have a clear picture of the events that took place before and after the invasion, but a lot of information exist that link the atrocities committed during the Iran-Iraq war to the support that Iraq had from the Western powers. The same information shows that the Western powers used Iraq as a test ground for the chemical weapons that were used during the Iran-Iraq war and also show that nothing was done to stop the situation. The people of Iraq and Iran both suffered equally from either using the weapons or the weapons being used against them. The challenges I faced during my research include my little understanding of the English language and having to read and re-read the journals and books in order to understand the meanings of the statements and highlighted points; the legal terms and language, and as a non-English speaker. Finally, from the essay I have gained and learned a lot of useful language, skills and haven I now have an idea of how to understand the legal argument. Also the essay gave me a brave understanding of the United Nations and its organizations and the challenges that face the decision making process within the whole system. It gave me a look into the power struggles that go on within the community of nations; therefore granting one country a lot of power to do what it wants to do. As much as it may seem justified, being a superpower doesn’t mean that the rest of the world shouldn’t be consulted when making such decisions. Read More