International Peace and Security - United Nations Charter - Essay Example

International Peace and Security Name of the Student: Name of the Instructor: Name of the course: Code of the course: Submission date: Critically assess the capacity of the United Nations Charter, and both the General Assembly and Security Council, to address threats to international peace and security Introduction It is an apparent fact that peace and security was deeply in the minds of the world leaders who assembled in San Francisco in 1945 to create the United Nations (Gupta, 2008, p. 1). As matter of fact, the first line in the preamble in the UN charter outlines the necessity to protect ‘the succeeding generations from the scourges of war’ (Charter of the United Nations, 1945, p. 1). Comprehensibly, the formulators of this charter had in mind the concept of avoiding war and other large intestate conflicts which threatened to jeopardize international peace and security (Fearon, 2005, p. 2). However, more than six decades later since the UN was founded, the threats to international peace and security have experienced drastic changes. At the same time, the member states have exhibited robust divisions in regard to the role of the UN in responding to threats, especially after the Iraq war (Dexiang, 2005, p 303). Terrorism has risen into becoming a major threat to peace and security. On the other hand, recent years have seen the heightened potential security threat which is posed by climate change and has become a major point of contention between decision makers in the North and the South (Brown & McLeman, 2009, p. 290). Amid these dynamics, this paper will critically evaluate the capacity of the United Nations Charter, and both the General Assembly and Security Council, to address threats to international peace and security. Background of global threats to peace and security in contemporary world In cognition of the highly evolved nature of threats to peace and security that the world confronts in the 21st century as mentioned above, the former Secretary general of the UN, Kofi Annan convened a panel of experts in September, 2003 – the High Level Panel on Threat, Challenges and Change with the core aim of ascertaining the current threats to international peace and security (Gupta, 2008, p. 1). In the subsequent report, this panel perceived threats to peace and security as ‘any event or process which culminates in large-scale death or lessening of life chances and undermines the state (s) as the basic unit of the international system. From this definition, this panel identified six groups which comprise threats namely, interstate conflicts, terrorism, transnational organized crime, internal conflict, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons as well as socio-economic threats which include extreme poverty, environmental degradation (including climate change) and disease (Gupta, 2008, p. 1). Despite this recognition, all these forms of threats to peace and security have continued to plague the modern world which has to a great extent dented the perceived role of the UN charter, Security Council and the general assembly to address the threats to peace and security in the contemporary world. This leads to the question on whether the UN charter, Security Council and the general assembly has the fundamental capacity of addressing threats to peace and security in the modern world. This is critically analyzed in the subsequent discourse. Has the UN charter, General Assembly and the Security Council failed? It is important to note that in order to fulfill its integral roles, the Security Council enjoys extensive powers as conferred in the UN charter (Galvan, 2011, p. 148). Nonetheless, this organ cannot avail itself in the enforcement measure in any given time. This is based on the fact that it is supposed to adhere to certain procedure in establishing that the conditions for the utility of such measures are satisfied (Vark, 2009, p. 217). Some of the reasons underpinning the malfunction of the UN charter and both the Security Council and the General Assembly are critically analyzed below. Veto power vs. the non-permanent membership The general organizational set-up of the General assembly and the Security Council in terms of the holders of veto power and non-permanent members has been extensively detrimental in their operations of addressing threats to peace and security. This was evident in the course of the cold war whereby the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) was not capable of performing the collective security role as bestowed to it in the UN charter (Morris & Wheeler, 2007, p. 215). The East/West confrontation during the cold war has been suggested as being the primary cause which hindered the effectiveness of decision making in the UN Security Council (Antony, 1991, p. 1). This is founded on the fact that the two antagonistic powers in this war which lasted until the eventual collapse of the USSR have veto powers in the UNSC. As a result, this prevented the Security Council from meeting its obligation as outlined in Article 24. Nonetheless, the UNSC and the General Assembly has been more decisive while dealing with threats to peace and security at the international platform which involves non-veto members, sometimes using excessive force. This is best epitomized by the fact that between 1992 and 31st December, 2002, the UNSC adopted a total of 39 resolutions dealing with Iraq (Browne, 2003, p. 3). Hikaru (2005, p. 39) determined that judging from the provisions of the UN charter, the Security Council has been extensively dysfunctional from the very instigation of the UN. This is founded on the fact that the Military Staff Committee (Article 47) which would be central in establishing military action by the UN became a dead organ, ensuring that the activities of the UN Security Council came to a standstill during the cold war in the standoff between the USSR and the US. Despite the elevated expectations on the UN Security Council after the cold war, this organ, together with the General assembly have proved to be unable to act swiftly and decisively as expected subsequent cases like the Bosnian and the Rwandan crisis analyzed below. This partiality in addressing threats to peace and security have made many commentators to point out that the UNSC, the General Assembly and the wider UN charter was purely framed to safeguard the interests of the veto power holders in this organization. This has seen many governments around the world rhetorically supporting the call for equity, specifically in increasing membership in both the General Assembly and the Security Council as well as eliminating the Veto. Nonetheless, little or no progress has been made on these procedural or numerical changes. This is founded on the fact that there has been no consensus in regard to the elimination of the veto exact shape of the UNSC (Weiss, 2003, p. 149). Therefore, the capacity of the UN charter and both the General Assembly and Security Council in addressing threats to international peace and security will continue to be hindered if at all the impartiality in action which is founded on nature of membership continue to persist. This is breached against the backdrop that Article 2(1) of the UN charter places a duty upon the United Nations (and its organs including the General Assembly and the Security Council) to act in accordance with the ‘principles of the sovereign equality of all its members (Davidson, 2003, p. 545). Operations of the UNSC in the Third world Another aspect which has marred the capacity of the UN charter, the Security Council and the General Assembly in addressing threats to international peace and security has been the apparent in the operations of UN in the third world. This was evident during the 1994 Rwandan genocide where 500,000 to 1 million Rwandan Tutsis alongside thousands of moderate Hutus were murdered in the clearest case of genocide since the Holocaust (Stanton, 2004, p. 211). This atrocities in Rwanda fully met the definition of genocide as articulated in the ‘convention of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide’ as adopted by the UN general assembly in 1948 (Eriksson et. al, 1996, p. 1). Nonetheless, despite the early warnings about this impending genocide, the international community being represented by the UN stood still and watched as this genocide unfolded. According to Stanton (2004, p. 211), there were plenty of ‘early warnings’ of the Rwandan genocide but there were systematically ignored. The best book in regard to the Rwandan genocide, A People Betrayed: The role of the West in Rwanda’s genocide by Linda Malvern clearly sets the details of the non-commitment of the UNSC and the General Assembly in addressing the early warnings on the genocide in Rwanda. After the Genocide materialized, the UNSC voted for the reduced presence of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Rwanda (UNAMIR). This latter organ had been mandated with the responsibility of overseeing the implementation of the Arusha Accords, the blueprint which was aimed at ending the civil war between the Hutu-dominated Rwandan government and the Tutsi-backed Rwandan Patriotic Force (RPF) and install a new and more representative government (Barnett, 1997, p. 558). This decision by the USC to reduce of the UNAMIR presence in Rwanda rather than initiate military action has been perceived as being the major reason behind the escalation of this genocide. Despite this realization, the UN general assembly and the Security Council has been perceived to exhibit massive indifference while dealing with atrocities in the third world in the subsequent years after the Rwandan genocide. This is evidenced by the heightened controversy over the informal threat made by the Russian and the Chinese governments to veto any resolution passed by the Security Council which might approve the use of military force, or even stern economic sanctions against the military regime in Khartoum. This was during the Darfur conflict in 2003-06 where massive atrocities were committed (Citizens for Global Solution, 2010, p. 5). At this instance, many commentators have determined that it is plausible that all the permanent five members of the UN Security Council (P5) reach a consensus not to use their veto power to block action while responding to genocide and mass atrocities which would have otherwise been passed by the majority (Citizens for Global Solution, 2010, p. 2). This indifference while dealing with threats to peace and security in the third world has to a great extent marred the perceived capacity of the UN charter and both the UNSC and the general assembly in addressing threats to peace and security. Conflict of goals and objectives Another perspective of the malfunctioning role of the UN charter, both the Security Council and the General Assembly in addressing threats to peace and security has been conflicting goals and objectives. This has been evident in different interventions by the UN, most recently in the Libyan crisis. This is whereby having approved the military intervention in the Libyan war, the Security Council did not play a central role in the shaping the conflict. This is especially after the NATO shifted from using force to protect the Libyan civilians towards explicitly aiming at ousting Gaddafi. In addition, the Security Council and the General Assembly have had little intervention in the reconstruction of the country (Gowan, 2011, p. 1). This has led to different commentators citing that these events in Libya raise serious questions regarding the legitimacy, legality and the feasibility of the ‘pro-democratic’ military intervention and about the role of the intervening states and the UNSC in regime change (Payandeh, 2012, p. 358). Gowan (2011, p. 1) cited that recent years have been extremely disappointing for the Security Council. This is despite playing central roles in responding to international crisis in countries like Libya and Cote d Ivoire. This is based on the fact that the council not only lost momentum in the course of these interventions, but also the objectives of these military interventions have changed into purely materialistic goals. In addition, the members of the UNSC have constantly fallen out over crises in Libya and Syria. This has resulted to the UNSC, the General Assembly and the wider UN charter losing credibility in addressing threats to international peace and security. Response to global terrorism It is imperative to note that diverse literature has been generated, mostly regarding the definition of this concept which have generated extensive anomalies, for instance, in works by Schmid and Jongman (1988), Gibbs (1989), Cooper (2001), Hoffman (1998) and Ruby (2002), among others. However, despite the general definition of the concept of terrorism, this does not invalidate the fact that terrorism has evolved into becoming a serious security threat which demands both domestic and international countermeasures. International countermeasures are particularly fundamental based on the fact that the leading terrorist functions in the contemporary world operate in the international spectrum. This is aimed at gaining wider exposure and acceptance and eventual increased success. The most relevant international countermeasure to terrorism has generally been associated with the Security Council. This is founded on the fact that diverse states have conferred the primary mandate of maintaining international peace and security to this body. In addition, the UNSC in cooperation with other organs like the General Assembly has considerable means at their disposal for initiating these countermeasures, instigating with diplomatic or economic sanctions and approving military measures as the last resort (Vark, 2009, p. 216). As a result, the UN, mostly epitomized by the Security Council and the General Assembly has played an integral role in the global campaigns against terrorist groups like Al-Qaida and other terrorist groupings. This was evidenced in the Madrid International Summit on Democracy in March 2005 where the former Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan outlined the general strategy against terrorism (Cortright, 2005, p. 1). To oversee the implementation of these counterterrorism strategies mostly after the September 11 terrorist attack on the US, the UNSC created the Counterterrorism Committee (CTC) and later the CTC Executive Directorate (CTED). The CTC is primarily composed of all the fifteen members of the UNSC and mandated with the role of evaluating the efforts of different states in the implementation of various counterterrorism resolutions and evaluating the gaps in the capacity of different states among other tasks. On the other hand, the CTED works towards fortifying and better coordinating the execution of the UNSC resolutions and conducting country assessment among other roles (Council on Foreign Relations, 2012, p. 1). Nonetheless, despite these prudent strategies the UNSC and the General Assembly has been formulated to counter terrorism, the undertakings of these bodies have been confronted by the challenge of uneven support from the members of the UN. This is best epitomized whereby some countries, most notably in the global south have perceived the CTC as being illegitimate, not to forget the assumption of these bodies being out of touch with the donor countries which are not in the Security Council (Council on Foreign Relations, 2012, p. 1). On the other hand, the counterterrorism measures framed by the UNSC and the General Assembly gaining have received backing and from different regional organizations like the European Union (EU), African Union (AU) and the South east Asian Nations. However, despite the delivery of formal statements from these organizations defining their shared commitment to counterterrorism, some of these organizations lack both the capacity, political will and funding to engage in aggressive pursuit of counterterrorism strategies. Moreover, majority of these institutions often work in isolation from the UN programs (Council on Foreign Relations, 2012, p. 1). These challenges have hindered a comprehensive and all-rounded capacity of the UN charter, the UNSC and the General Assembly to address the threat to peace and security posed by the increasing trends of global terrorism. In addition, despite the fact that the UN-sponsored sanctions have achieved high effectiveness in addressing state-sponsored terrorism, for instance in Sudan and Libya, this strategy has been less effective against non-state actors like Al-Qaida and the Taliban among others since they were ousted out of power (Council on Foreign Relations, 2012, p. 1). Nonetheless, it is imperative to note United Nations and its organs has been successful in ending conflicts and fostering reconciliation in some countries since 1948 which include Cambodia, Guatemala, Mozambique, Namibia, Tajikistan and Timor-Leste among others. In addition, through the provision of basic security and initiating response to various crises, the UN and its organs has supported political transitions and also assisted institutions in some fragile states. This has helped these countries in ending conflicts and initiating normal development (United Nations Peacekeeping website, 2012, p. 1). Conclusion and Recommendations From the preceding discourse, it is apparent that the increased influence of holders of veto power in the UNSC and the General assembly continue to negatively affect and frustrate efforts towards peace and security. In addition, the commitment of the UNSC in upholding peace and security in the third world has continued to be marred by controversies, not forgetting the conflicting goals and objectives in the UN interventions. Lastly, the response of the UNSC to global terrorism is also questionable and all these realities have exposed the incapacity of the UN charter, the UNSC as well as the General assembly to address the issues of peace and security in the contemporary world. Amid all the realities explored in the preceding section, it is recommended in this paper that the veto power enjoyed by some states ought to be abolished to pave way for increased effectiveness in decision making in these organs. In addition, more efforts ought to be made to increase the membership and scope of various organs in the UN. Lastly, elevated coordination between the UN organs and other organizations both at the national and regional level ought to be fostered in order to achieve effectiveness in cultivating peace and security, mostly in counterterrorism efforts. References Antony, SI., 1991, ‘Post-Cold War Role of the UN Security Council’, USAWC Military Studies Program Paper, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Barnett, MN., 1997, ‘The UN Security Council, Indifference, and Genocide in Rwanda’, Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 551-578. Brown, O., & McLeman, R, 2009, ‘A recurring anarchy? The emergence of climate change as a threat to international peace and security’, Conflict, Security & Development, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 289-305. Browne, MA., 2003, ‘The United Nations Security Council – Its Role in the Iraq Crisis: A Brief Overview’, CRS Report for Congress, Congressional Research Service, Washington D.C. Charter of the United Nations, 1945, ‘Charter of the United Nationsand Statute of the International Court of Justice’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, . Citizens for Global Solution, 2010, ‘The Responsibility Not To Veto: A Way Forward’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, . Cooper, HH, 2001, ‘Terrorism: The Problem of Definition Revisited’, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 44, pp. 881-893. Cortright, D., 2005, ‘A Critical Evaluation of the UN Counterterrorism Program: Accomplishments and Challenges’, Crime & Globalization Paper, Transnational Institute (TNI), Amsterdam. Council on Foreign Relations, 2012, ‘The Global Regime for Terrorism’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, . Davidson, E., 2003, ‘The Security Council's obligations of good faith’, Florida Journal of International Law, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.541-573. Dexiang, L., 2005, ‘The Report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, A More Secured World: Our Shared Responsibility’, Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 303-309. Eriksson, J., et. al, 1996, ‘The International Response to Conflict and Genocide: Lessons from the Rwanda Experience’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, . Fearon, JD, 2005, ‘Reforming International Institutions to Promote International Peace and Security’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, . Galvan, ML., 2011, ‘Interpretation of Article 39 of the UN Charter (Threat to the Peace) by the Security Council: Is the Security Council a Legislator for the Entire International Community?’, Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, Vol. 11, p. 147-185. Gibbs, JP. 1989, ‘Conceptualization of Terrorism’, American Sociological Review, Vol. 54, pp. 329-340. Gowan, R., 2011, ‘The Security Council’s Credibility Problem’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, < http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/08815-20120103.pdf>. Gupta, S., 2008, ‘Environmental Law and Policy: Climate Change as a Threat to International Peace and Security’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, . Hikaru, Y., 2005, ‘The Iraq War, the United Nations Security Council, and the Legitimacy of the Use of Force’, NIDS Security Reports, No. 6, pp. 38-92. NIDS, Tokyo, Japan. Hoffman, B., 1998, Inside Terrorism, Columbia University Press, New York. Morris, J. & Wheeler, NJ., 2007, ‘The Security Council's Crisis of Legitimacy and the Use of Force’,International Politics, Vol. 44, pp. 214–231. Payandeh, M., 2012, ‘The United Nations, Military Intervention, and Regime Change in Libya’, Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp. 355-403. Ruby, CL, 2002, ‘The Definition of Terrorism’, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 2, pp. 9-14. Schmid, AP & Jongman, AJ., 1988, Political Terrorism, Transaction Books, New York. Stanton, GH., 2004, ‘Could the Rwandan genocide have been prevented?’, Journal of Genocide Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 211–228. United Nations Peacekeeping website, 2012, ‘Success in Peacekeeping’, retrieved 04 January, 2013, < http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/success.shtml>. Vark, R., 2009, ‘Terrorism as a Threat to Peace’, Juridica international, Vol. 16, pp. 216-223. Weiss, TG., 2003, ‘The Illusion of UN Security Council Reform’, The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 147–161. Read More