Threat to International Peace and Security - Research Paper Example

Critically consider the United Nations Security Council’s interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ within Article 39 of the UN Charter. With reference to examples, to what extent has the Security Council’s recent interpretation The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is an integral part of the United Nations which aims to maintain peace and security in international level. The main aim of UNSC pointed out in the UN Charter includes peace keeping operations and is extended to international sanctions and military actions. The membership of UNSC includes five members with permanent membership that enjoy veto-power and other ten members with limited power in the decision making process. The authority of UNSC to get involved in international affairs is executed by the help of resolutions. The Article 39 of the UN Charter empowers the Security Council to take decisions and implement apt measures. On the other side, rapid spread of terrorism and the threat from weapons of mass destruction (WMD) compel the UN to reconsider its initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’. Thesis statement: An investigation to unearth the scope of the United Nations Security Council’s interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ within Article 39 of the UN Charter by critically examining earlier UN intervention in Conflict between states and the Security Council’s recent interpretation of the same. The Security Council-composition, functions, and powers The Security Council within the United Nations enjoys a unique position and is an autonomous body which takes decisions regarding to international peace and security. At same time, other organs of the United Nations possess limited power and can put forth recommendations to the member states. The member states of the United Nations are responsible to execute the resolutions taken by the Security Council members. As mentioned earlier, the most important function of the Security Council is to take effective measures to maintain international peace and security. The Security Council is authorised to conduct investigation on international disputes and to recommend effective measures to settle the same. In addition, the Security Council is authorised to regulate armaments in international level. Another function of the Security Council is to identify threats which may harm world peace. In addition, it is permitted to impose economic embargo against the states which violate international laws. This does not prove that the power of the Security Council is limited to the sphere of economic embargo, but it enjoys immense power to take military action towards member, non-member states which violate international laws. The Security Council is responsible to take decision to permit new members to join the United Nations. The Security Council is empowered with Trusteeship functions and it can provide recommendations in elections conducted for the selection of UN Secretary-General, UN General Assembly and International Court. Summing, the functions of the Security Council makes clear that it plays the most important role in maintenance of world peace. But David Malone opines that: “The slow but seemingly irrevocable drift into the Cold War had a paralyzing effect on the Council” (Malone 17). The effect of the Cold War on the proper functioning of the Security Council remained throughout the Cold War era. But the decisions taken by the Security Council regarding to international peace and security is with far reaching consequences. The Security Council’s initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ As the key terms mentioned in the Article 39 of the UN Charter are not properly defined, the Security Council members enjoy immense power to interpret the same according to their motives. In other words, the Article 39 mentioned in the UN Charter empowers the Security Council to determine the course of action to maintain international peace and security. David Schweigman reflects that the Article 39 in Chapter VII empowers the Security Council to decide on any attempt to breach international peace and security (Schweigman 184). However, the scope for further development and co-operation was limited because the whole world was divided into two blocs; first under the United States and the second under the U.S.S.R. The veto power enjoyed by the permanent members limited the scope of misusing the Security Council Resolutions for selfish motives. It is interesting to point out that the intervention of the Unites Nations, especially the Security Council, i.e. the decision making body of the UN to maintain world peace strictly limited its discretionary power to the sphere of conflict between States. Here are some examples for the initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ by the Security Council. UN intervention in Conflict between Argentina & UK As pointed out earlier, the role of the United Nations in settling international conflicts between states is noteworthy. The United Nations played the most important role in neutralising the conflict between Argentina & UK on Falklands/Malvinas dispute. Michael Brecher and Jonathan Wilkenfeld reflect that the Argentine attempt to occupy the Islands forced the UN Security Council to criticize the same and it led to Resolution 502 for immediate withdrawal of Argentine troops from the Island (Brecher and Wilkenfeld 525). The war between both the nations in 1982 was based on political grounds. For example, the Argentine government showed eagerness to make use of the dispute to raise anti-British opinion in Argentina. But the timely involvement of the United Nations reduced the risk of a bloody war between Argentina & UK. Moreover, from the year 1964 itself, the United Nations Committee for Decolonization tried hard to settle the dispute without further problems. But the dispute is not yet settled. Even though, the timely reaction of the United Nations reduced further bloodshed. UN intervention in Conflict between Palestine &Israel The UN intervention in the conflict between Palestine &Israel was helpful to minimise the tension between the same but the risk of war is not out of focus. In 1947, the UN helped the Jews to form a nation of their own. The United Nations General Assembly Resolution or partition plan backed up by Resolution 181(II) was helpful to divide Palestine into Israel and Arab States. The Soviet Union and its allies supported the partition plan put forth by the United Nations. The UN gave approval to the plan of partition in 1947. But Palestine was not satisfied with this partition. In addition, Jerusalem was under the direct control of the UN administration. This action aimed to minimise the political and religious tension between Israel and Palestine. But this action was not so helpful to limit the risk of conflict between Israel and Palestine. William B. Quandt makes clear that the Arabs were not ready to deal with Israel (Quandt 4). The Arabs were ready to deal with Israel through the US, the UN and Soviet Union. It is important to point out that United Nations showed keen interest to minimise the risk of bloodshed in the Middle East Asia. One can see that religion and aggressive nationalism are the key factors behind the conflict between Israel and Palestine. But the direct involvement of the United Nations helped the Jewish community to form a nation. In brief, the initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ by the Security Council was limited to the sphere of conflict between states. But change in the sphere of international politics and transformation from a bi-polar world deeply influenced the Security Council’s initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’. The UN intervention in the internal matters of States As pointed out earlier, the initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ by the United Nations, especially the Security Council was strictly based on its initiative to resolve conflict between states. The rapid change in world politics, industrialisation, globalisation, privatisation etc limited its scope. The interpretation of the term ‘threat to international peace and security’ is extremely difficult. The change in international politics forced the United Nations to interpret the term beyond its initial aim to intervene in conflict between states. More to the point, the new world order put forth by globalisation was capable to increase cooperation between states and it gradually reduced the scope of national boundaries. But still the states face problem from domestic insurgencies. This change forced the United Nations to reconsider its initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’. Here are some examples that points out the intervention of the United Nations in internal matters of world nations. Haiti The intervention of the United Nations in Haiti was based on humanitarian objective. For instance, the United Nations considered the internal military coup in Haiti as a serious threat to neighbouring nations which are based on democracy. So the intervention of the United Nations in Haiti can be considered as the humanitarian attempt to create a democratic authority in Haiti. Peter Malanczuk and Michael Barton Akehurst opine that “Haiti is a special case in which the Security Council authorized the use of force under Chapter VII” (Malanczuk and Akehurst 407). The case of Haiti must be considered as special because the aim of Security Council’ aim was to implement democracy in Haiti. The criticism on the United Nations’ decision to intervene in the domestic matters of Haiti is out of focus because this can be termed under humanitarian response to create/restore democracy. Somalia In the year 1991-92, the Somali Government collapsed and people were forced to meet death due to hunger and starvation. This critical situation in Somalia forced the United Nations to intervene in its internal matters. In 1992, the United Nations determined that situation in Somalia is a threat to neighbouring nations and an armed intervention was inevitable. P. J. I. M. de Waart, Erik Denters and Nico Schrijver opine that the United Nations considered the internal conflict in Somalia as a threat to international security (Waart, Denters and Schrijver 311). So the armed Operation namely, UNOSOM II was implemented in Somalia. The Military Operation based on human rights came to an end in1993 and the operation was considered as successful. Iraq In the year 2003, the intervention of United Nations in Iraq was based on an allied coalition force. The military operation was conducted without the sanction of Security Council Resolution. But it can be argued that the reason behind the intervention of United Nations in Iraq was a preventive response against Iraq’s breach of international Law. Paul Lewis makes clear that the Resolution 686 by the Security Council was adopted and the intervention of United Nations in Iraq came to an end (Lewis 14). So, the intervention of United Nations in Iraq is a preventive response against the despotic rule in Middle East, which threatened world peace. Kosovo In 1992, the Serbians attacked the Kosovo Albanians. In the year 1999, NATO intervened in Kosovo to resist the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The Resolution 1244 helped the United Nations to intervene in the domestic affair of Kosovo. More to the point, the NATO considered Serbian attack as genocide to destroy Kosovo Albanians. Robert Wright makes clear that small scale usage of arms and ammunition in internal conflict is less effective and the Kosovo intervention prove this fact (Wright A27). The air campaign carried out by the NATO came to an end in 1999, and negotiation with the United Nations in 2007 helped Kosovo to gain limited independence. Yugoslavia In the year 1999, the NATO declared that the Yugoslavian government is fully responsible for the humanitarian disaster occurring in Yugoslavia. This declaration was misused to attack Yugoslavia which resulted in large scale destruction of Yugoslavian economy. Barbara Crossette opines that: “Only China did not support the resolution” (Crossette A8). China opined that the crisis in Kosovo is to be considered as an internal issue of Yugoslavia and the Security Council does not have any legitimate right to interfere in this internal issue. So the decision taken and implemented by the United Nations to intervene in the domestic affair of Yugoslavia proved to be disastrous. Congo From 1960 to 1964, the Congo faced the problem of internal insurgency. The Congolese leader Lumumba was assassinated in 1961 and this incident added fuel to the internal insurgency. Kenneth Manusama makes clear that this incident forced the United Nations to declare the resolution 161 in 1961 (Manusama 58). The civil war in Congo was termed as an immediate threat to world peace. The real problem behind the insurgency in Congo was the failure of socio-economic structure originated from the following years of decolonisation process. The military operation undertaken by the United Nations proved to be an utter failure and was unable to fulfil its aim. Rwanda The conflict between Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda forced the United Nations to implement a military operation in Rwanda. In the year 1994, the United Nations despatched UNAMIR, a military unit to resist the genocide by Hutus against Tutsis. The United Nations was not ready to provide humanitarian aid in the initial stages of conflict. Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela R. Aall criticize that the failure of humanitarian intervention in Rwanda is one of the best examples of United Nations failure to provide humanitarian aid to the global community (Crocker, Hampson and Aall 511). So the military operation conducted by United Nations in Rwanda proved to be futile. The foretold examples prove that the policies of the United Nations are undergoing rapid change. But this must not be misinterpreted as the control of Security Council over the United Nations. The change in global political scenario forces the United Nations to reinterpret its initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’. What extend has the Security Council’s recent interpretation of ‘threat to international peace and security’ is deviated from its initial understanding? As pointed out earlier, the initial understanding of ‘threat to international peace and security’ was based on conflict resolution between states. Gareth J. Evans reflects that the 1945 UN Charter prove that the use of force in international matters is subjected to international law (Evans 129). The change in international politics originated from the post Cold War years forced the Security Council members to be cooperative and it helped the United Nations to gain the new role of a peace keeper cum negotiator. The end of the World War II compelled the world to set up an innovative forum or medium to resolve international disputes. This created the favourable condition for the development of the United Nations. The initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ was strictly limited to the sphere of conflict between UN member and non-member states. The Cold War era proved to be destructive to the proper functioning of the United Nations and the Security Council. The Cold War era resulted in constant conflict between superpowers and the whole world was torn apart into two blocs. The end of Cold War era helped the United Nations to regain its importance in international scenario. In 1980s, favourable condition emerged for international cooperation and it resulted in a cooperation of major powers in international matters. The new security threats like domestic insurgencies, coupes, civil wars, global spread of terrorism, religious fundamentalism etc forced the United Nations and the Security Council to reconsider the initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’. In addition, the superpowers began to depend upon the United Nations to handle international conflicts. Now, the United Nations give importance to peace settlement through negotiations. But this does not prove that the United Nations is inactive. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, the United Nations was ready to render its help. The United Nations is ready to provide top priority to resolve conflicts in the Middle East. So, one can easily identify that the end of the Cold War changed the role of the United Nations and the influence of globalisation and new world order minimised the difference between the East and the West. In 1987, the United Nations played the major role to end the conflict between Iran and Iraq. At the same time, in the year 1998, the United Nations was capable to compel the Soviet Union for an immediate retreat from Afghanistan. So, one can see that change in global politics, cooperation between superpowers, new threats to world peace and security etc forced the United Nations to change its initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’. The new role of the United Nations as an organ to settle international conflicts by providing sanctions, economic embargo (if needed), peace keeping missions, negotiations etc provide immense importance to the same. The reason behind the deviation of the UN’s initial understanding of the concept of ‘threat to international peace and security’ The deviation of the UN’s initial understanding of the concept of ‘threat to international peace and security’ was gradual, not rapid. The examples that are mentioned, like the UN intervention in the internal matters of States, like the conflict between Argentina & UK, Palestine &Israel, Soviet Union & Afghanistan, Iran & Iraq, Iraq & Kuwait etc prove that the UN provided primary concern to resolve conflict between states. The Article 41 of the UN Charter helped the Security Council to take decisions on usage of force to resolve international conflicts. Harry. H. G. Post makes clear that the Article 41, Chapter VII empowers the Security Council to take decisions on its own, without any internal or external influence (Post 164). The Article 41 connected to the Article 39 helps the Security Council to act as an independent board to take decisions on international matters which affects world peace and security. The Article 42 of the U.N. Charter permits the Security Council to take immediate action to withstand threats against world peace. Stephen J. Cimbala makes clear that: “Article 42 of the U.N. Charter authorizes the U.N. Security Council to take collective action to restore peace in the face of aggression” (Cimbala 147). The Security Council can make use of all possible ways of operations to restore peace. When this Article is connected with Article 39, the U.N. Security Council is the most powerful international union that can withstand any sort of threat against humanity. The examples that are pointed out earlier which focus on the deviation of the UN’s initial understanding of the concept of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ and its decision to intervene in the internal matters of States prove that change in global politics forced it to rethink its initial understanding. The examples that are mentioned like UN intervention in the internal matters of Haiti, Somalia, Iraq, Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Congo, and Rwanda prove that traditional mode of insurgency is no more an issue and it is important to focus on internal matters of weaker nations. William J. Lahneman makes clear that the issues originated in 1990s prove that conflicts related to human right violations must be considered as important and it is the responsibility of the UN to restore peace and security in those territories (Lahneman 174). The global spread of terrorism and religious fundamentalism is an immediate threat to world peace. So it will not be safe for the global community, especially the UN to keep aloof from these issues. Findings The discussion based on the Security Council, its composition, its functions, its powers, its initial interpretation of a ‘threat to international peace and security’, its intervention in the internal matters of States, deviation from its initial understanding of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ and reason behind the deviation prove that it is important to point out the main findings. 1. The Security Council within the framework of the United Nations enjoy immense power to determine threats against world peace and to take effective measures to withstand the same. 2. The gradual transformation of the UN’s initial understanding of the concept of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ is due to the changes in global political scenario and changes occurred due to globalisation and the new world order. 3. The scope of traditional understanding of the concept of ‘threat to international peace and security’ is no more important because conflict between states is out of focus. 4. The change in the role of the Security Council and the UN as a negotiator, peace keeping force with immense power to take decisions on international matters is noteworthy. 5. The criticism of the misuse of power by the Security Council is no more an issue because the superpowers are ready to cooperate in international matters and they shows readiness to depend upon the UN as a negotiator. Summing up, the investigation to unearth the reason behind the change of UN understanding of the concept of a ‘threat to international peace and security’ and the scope of its new role as an international peace keeping force through negotiation prove the UN is ready to change according to the new world order. The sudden response by the UN in international issues and its role in negotiation to solve internal conflicts prove its worth as a peace keeping force. But the scope of the Security Council and the UN must not be limited to the sphere of conflict resolution and must be extended to other spheres like reconstruction of nations which face internal coups, civil wars and poverty, natural disasters and manmade disasters. Then the aim of the Security Council and the UN as a platform for world nations will be fulfilled. References Brecher, Michael, and Jonathan Wilkenfeld. A study of crisis. USA: University of Michigan Press, 1997. Crossette, Barbara. “Security Council Tells Serbs To Stop Kosovo Offensive.” The New York Times 24 September 1998: A8. Crocker, Chester A., Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela R. Aall. Leashing the dogs of war: conflict management in a divided world. USA: US Institute of Peace Press, 2007. Cimbala, Stephen J. Politics of Warfare. USA: Penn State Press, 2004. Evans, Gareth J. The responsibility to protect: ending mass atrocity crimes once and for all. USA: Brookings Institution Press, 2008. Lahneman, William J. Military intervention: cases in context for the twenty-first century. USA: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004. Lewis, Paul. “After The War; Iraq Accused of Failing to Adhere To Conditions for a Formal Truce.” The New York Times 16 March 1991: 14. Malanczuk, Peter, and Michael Barton Akehurst. Akehursts modern introduction to international law. New York, NY: Routledge, 1997. Malone, David. The UN Security Council: from the Cold War to the 21st century. USA: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2004. Manusama, Kenneth. The United Nations Security Council in the post-cold war era: applying the principle of legality. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2006. Post, Harry. H. G. International economic law and armed conflict. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1994. Quandt, William B. Peace process: American diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2001. Schweigman, David. The authority of the Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter: legal limits and the role of the International Court of Justice. USA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001. Waart, P. J. I. M., Erik Denters, and Nico Schrijver. Reflections on international law from the low countries: in honour of Paul de Waart. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1998. Wright, Robert. “The Peace Thats Within Our Grasp.” The New York Times 12 September 2000: A27. Read More