Law resolves conflict and encourages cooperation - Essay Example

LAW RESOLVES CONFLICT AND ENCOURAGES COOPERATION How the law resolves conflict and encourages cooperation in world order History has judged that the rule of law is paramount to suppress anarchy and to prevent the situations from escalating into conflict. With the rise of huge independent states and different ideologies, there is a need for proper governance as people interaction could trigger rivalry. Laws outline the terms of engagement in tackling certain issues that could cause dispute or turmoil between countries or regions in the world. Failure of the rule of law saw the occurrence of many drastic calamities in the last century. Such failures have led to the creation of mechanisms that are effective in settling disputes. The mechanisms are both legal and non-legal. This paper will evaluate how effectively the law resolves conflict and encourages cooperation in the world order. Several situations are a threat to global peace such as nuclear weapons, terrorist activities and growth of ISIS. There are several international organisations that have the role of maintain world order. Some organisations such as the International Red Cross and Amnesty International have an indirect connection to the state, thus have no way to influence them. The only way that they could exert pressure is by exposing and embarrassing the states through the media (Stahn & Melber, 2014). The Role of the UN The main legal organ with the responsibility of maintaining world order is the United Nations. The primary purpose of its establishment was to maintain international peace. It is noted that previously there were no means of achieving peace and most of the institutions that existed at the time could not perform their mandate. The members, therefore, stated all the principles, procedures, and methods that could be needed in achieving the much-required peace. In the Charter, the members outlined all the means to be used in the adjustment of disputes and the collective measures to undertake in case of any breach (Bailliet & Larsen, 2015). The Charter insisted that the first measure of dealing with disputes was seeking a peaceful settlement. All the peaceful means that the institution could adopt are listed clearly in the Charter. With the failure of the first method, the second method to undertake is a collective measure of prevention and removal any threats to the achievement of the peace intended. It is through these two methods that the United Nations use to maintain the international peace and world order (Weiss et al., 2014). The Pacific Settlement The procedures for this type of settlement are outlined in the Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter. Of all the parties engaged in a dispute, they are expected to seek a solution through, enquiry, negotiation, arbitration, mediation, judge settlement, conciliation or any other peaceful engagement. Since the first position involves the parties seeking a peaceful solution, it relieves the institution of the stress of having to intervene in issues that could be settled without much intervention. In the cases that the parties fail to meet a peaceful resolution, it is the duty of the Security Council to intervene. The Council could intervene on its initiative, by attention from the General Assembly, by invitation of any member of UN, by the Secretary General or any party to the dispute in question (Bailliet & Larsen, 2015). The Security Council is expected to take either of the three actions to settle the matter. These are as follows; One, the councils summons the parties and engages them in settling the disputes through the methods outlined in Article 33. Second it may describe the methods of adjustment, and third it may recommend the means of settlement. The General Assembly has no business to make any recommendations on a matter that is still under the Security Council unless it has been invited to the case (Bailliet & Larsen, 2015). Role of the UN in Rwanda Genocide The Rwanda Genocide in 1994 is one of the worst examples of the threat to the world order in the last century. The former Secretary-General of the UN, Kofi Annan, commissioned an independent report to seek the questions asked on the role of the UN in maintain peace and order in the country. There were several allegations on the UN that it had failed its mandate in keeping the peace in the region. From the report, it was evident that the Security Council had failed to act on information that was available, which predicted that there was to be a mass slaughter of people in the country. Both Annan and Boutros (the then Secretary General) were unwilling to act on the information and stop the massive slaughter. Annan acknowledged the failure and expressed deep remorse on behalf of the organisation. The former Swedish Prime Minister, Ingvar Carlsson, acknowledged that the failure to prevent the genocide was because of the lack of will to commitment and resources to prevent the attack (Grünfeld & Huijboom, 2007). The mission of the UN in Rwanda (which began in October 1993) was to oversee a cease-fire agreement between the two warring sides. The mission was limited as its mandate was restricted to monitor cease-fire breaches, contribute to security in Kigali and to provide humanitarian aid. The reported showed that Annan did not share a cable sent to the Security Council on the dangers of genocide. There was very little political will from the members of the Council to react to the killings once they started. This report outlined 14 key recommendations to prevent the occurrence of another genocide. Role of UN in Libya Crisis The UN responded promptly to the situation in Libya in 2011. It proved that it could be a powerful tool for prevention, management and resolving conflict. In 2011, the UN used two methods to bring resolutions on Libya. The 1970 Resolution demanded the Libyan government to protect its people, call for the end of violence, disarm fighters and impose sanctions on some targets. Also, it referred the matter to the International Criminal Court. The second was the 1973 resolution that allowed for military intervention in Libya. The goal of his mission was to protect the people of Libya from the government forces. After months of the war, the mission came to an end and the Council applauded it as a success with the death of Muammar Gaddafi (In Hehir & In Murray, 2013). Role of UN in ISIS The UN has been on the forefront in the war against ISIS. The terrorist organisation has caused many deaths and is a threat to world peace. This is the main issue currently being handled by the UN Security Council. On February, 2015 the United Nations Security Council approved measures that target to stop the financiers of the group. In this measure, the council has banned trade with Iraq and Syria and it has asked the US to stop paying ransoms to the group. Acting under the Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Council has suspended any trade especially of oil products arising from that region. Since the beginning of threat of ISIL, the Security Council has taken many measures in controlling the massacres including engaging airstrikes in the region. ISIL is a threat to world order, with the intention of disrupting the normal boundaries in the Middle East (Corombos, 2015). Conclusion From the illustrations above, it evident that the world cannot depend solely on the International organisations to maintain peace. In fact, diplomacy has failed to prevent the occurrence of two major world wars. This calls for its effectiveness in question. The UN is currently the most powerful international organisation to maintain world peace. However, it does not have a tangible global structure of governance. Therefore, the compliance with the laws made by the organisation face much resistance and cannot be forced into other countries. Thus, the utopia of achieving a world order becomes difficult with the current situations. References Corombos, G. (2015, February 17). U.N. urged to take charge in confronting ISIS. Retrieved from WND: http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/u-n-urged-to-take-charge-in-confronting-isis/ Grünfeld, F., & Huijboom, A. (2007). The failure to prevent genocide in Rwanda: The role of bystanders. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff. In Hehir, A., & In Murray, R. (2013). Libya, the responsibility to protect and the future of humanitarian intervention. Bailliet, C. M., & Larsen, K. M. (2015). The international law of practice. Corby: Oxford University Press. Stahn, C., & Melber, H. (2014). Peace diplomacy, global justice and international agency: Rethinking human security and ethics in the spirit of Dag Hammarskjöld. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Weiss, T. G., Forsythe, D. P., Coate, R. A., & Pease, K.-K. S. (2014). The United Nations and changing world politics. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press. Read More