The UN Security Council: an analysis of its resolution effectiveness - Essay Example

The UN Security Council: An Analysis of its Resolution Effectiveness The United Nation was created on October 24, 1945 with originally 50 member countries and has grown to 185 members to date ("United Nation Charter", Historical Documents). This organization of nation's primary aim is "To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law ()" ( UN Charter, Chapter 1,Article1,1st par). Among the different councils of the UN, the Security Council is the one in charge of bringing out the primary purpose of maintaining peace and order among the different nation members and seeing to it that global order is in placed at all times. The duties and responsibilities of the council is outlined in Chapters V1 and V11 of the UN Charter. Chapter V1 deals with peaceful means of settling disputes that will endanger the state of international peace and security like diplomatic talks, negotiation, conciliation, arbitration and other means the country in question pleases (Wikipedia, "U.N. Security Council"). Resolutions of the Security Council based on Chapter V1 is not legally binding in the international court of law. Chapter V11 deal with actions related to use of force in cases of breach to peace and acts of aggression and will be resorted to if actions based on Chapter V1 failed. It is in the interpretation of acts related to Chapter V1 and V11 where the confusion and alleged ineffectiveness of UN Security Council in the eyes of nations emanated. This paper aims to analyze the acceptability of Resolutions of Security Council as a result of the interplay of rights and influence of individual member nations. Further, this paper aims to recommend actions for the UNSC to be responsive to its duties and responsibilities. 2 The United States in 1979 imposed broad economic sanctions against Iran as a reaction to the American hostage crisis and the Islamic revolution which resulted in the overthrow of American ally, the Shah (global policy.org, U.N. sanctions against Iran, 1st par.). The global policy.org added that since that time, Washington imposed additional sanctions on Tehran and accused the Iranian government of nuclear weapon development and funding overseas terrorism. The sanction resulted to blockage of US oil companies in Iran and that of US foreign competitors. Reading between the lines, this is what the US desire due to the fact that the sanction will give the US a step ahead of its foreign competitors in manipulating Iran's oil reserve. The global policy .org further reported that in February 2003, Iran voluntarily revealed the existence of an uranium enrichment facility in Natanz claiming that the technology is for peaceful purposes and invited the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to visit the site. The US however claimed that the technology is part of the program to develop nuclear weapons which is supposed to be only for the five permanent member countries the Security Council. The US sought to refer the case to the Security Council as this is a case of endangering the peace and security of the globe, the global policy.org said. Iran, in order to prevent the case to be forwarded to Security Council signed a temporary agreement with Germany, France and Britain to voluntarily cease development of the uranium enrichment technology in November 2004. A clean bill of health was given to Iran by IAEA but as days passed, the agency declared that they are not certain whether Iran really stopped its uranium enrichment technology and so the case was finally referred to the US Security Council for possible action and preempt the nuclear danger. The global policy.org reported that in May 2006, a resolution endorsing the P5 plus an offer of Germany for diplomatic and economic relief and demanded a stop 3 by Iran of its nuclear program by August 31, 2006. The global policy .org reported further that Iran failed to comply with the demand and so in December 2006, the Council imposed sanctions on Iran's trade in nuclear materials and technology. The IAEA gave a 60 day grace period for Iran to comply in exchange for lifting of the UN sanction but Iran ignored the offer. As a result of Iran's hardheadedness, as reported by global policy.org, in March 2007, the Security Council passed Resolution 1747 intensifying the previous sanction package. Iran was not shaken according to global policy.org and instead continue with its uranium enrichment program. Reporters of LA times.com claimed on the effect of the sanction on Iran after barely a year that "They have an impact; they have a heavy impact on the economy, said a Western diplomat in Tehran who is among those who regularly brief officials in Washington about the situation in Iran" (Dagarashi and Mostaghim, 5th par.). The reporters further revealed that imports from Asian and other European countries still continue to enter Iran. Analyzing the effectiveness of the UNSC sanction to Iran in the light of the works of the symposium keynoted by Ban Kae Moon (2007 UN Secretary General) on Enhancing the Implementation of UNSC Sanctions, one can say that the success is only partial. Among others, the Symposium declared that "Sanctions are a powerful expression of the collective voice and the collective will of the international community. As such, their symbolic impact is undeniable. Their practical impact () have helped to prod conflicting parties towards compromise" (Enhancing the Implementation, p.3.). As reported by LA Times.com, Asian and European exports continue to pour in to Tehran up to this year. This is an indication that the Security Council lack the political will to make the sanction really a success. The UNSC should punish those countries who still supply basic needs of Iran 4 thus neutralizing the possible crippling effect of the sanction and letting Iran disregard with impunity the Security Council's sanction. It appears that the sanction was only dictated by powerful UNSC members interested in the oil revenue wealth of Iran and is not internationally supported or lack collective will from other nation members. Another country in the Middle East also rich in oil reserve and is now engaged in war with US as a result of ignoring UNSC sanctions is Iraq. Operation Dessertstorm started January 17, 1993 ( BBC News. Front page). The stance deeply angered the allies of the US namely France and Britain and so they engaged the Iraqis in war for failure to heed to UNSC Resolution 1441 calling for a stop of uranium enrichment activity. US Secretary of State Colin Powell in February 5, 2003 in his address to UNSC entitled " Iraq, Denial and Deception" declared that "We wrote 1441 not in order to go to war, we wrote 1441 to try to preserve the peace. We wrote 1441 to give Iraq one last chance. Iraq is not so far taking that one last chance" (Powell, 230th par.). Mr. Powell was so visibly irked by the denial and deception strategy being done by Iraq to hide their nuclear activities for a good number of years and 13 times of inspection by IAEA in a span of 2 years. Moreover, Saddam Hussein, the President of Iraq during the invasion was proven by the US Intelligence Service to have links with Al Queda, the suspect of the US responsible for the 9/11 attack of the World Trade Center. Analyzing the result of the moves of Security Council which issued series of Resolutions to force Iraq to submit to the demand of the UN thereby preventing the war, lack of political will to soften the stance of Iraq was apparently lacking. Economic sanctions are geared to soften the stance due to the fact that trade and commerce will be at the standstill and the government subject to sanction will wither in hunger and lack of 5 finances to support the subversive activities but in this case, the Security Council failed. There is only one reason for this but available literature cannot document it. It might be that other superpowers, also members of the UN with anti-US sentiment is or are supporting Iraq clandestinely. This is the reason why Iraq and Sadam Hussein refused to buckle down despite the war until his captivity. The big question is, who is supporting the subversives in Iraq with guns, munitions and money to fight the US in this seems to be never ending war between them and the allies. The Security Council seems to lack finances and manpower to support intelligence gathering to know who are the supporters of Iraq and punish them under the international law or the council is invaded already with anti-US countries which are orchestrating all of this just like a computer invaded with virus and spywares. North Korea is another country who early this year is still in the stand off with UN Security Council on nuclear disarmament. Due to the economic sanctions by the UN for several years now, the population was neglected by the state, dying of hunger and suffering from human rights violation brought about by the state. The US Committee for Human Rights in North Korea in October 30, 2006 declared that "Although in recent weeks the international focus has been on North Korea's nuclear weapons test, the situation in that country is also one of the most egregious human rights and humanitarian disasters in the world" (Failure to Protect, foreword 1st par.). The call for action to UN Security Council is based on the "Unanimous adoption by the UN Security Council of the doctrine that each state has a responsibility to protect its own egregious of human rights abuses, a new instrument for international diplomacy" (Failure to Protect, foreword 2nd par.). The call by the international community is aimed to assist the Security Council to soften the stance of the North Korean government on dismantling its nuclear armament. The strategy paid off 6 due to the fact in June 26, 2008, the White House removes North Korea from terrorist list and call off the economic sanctions as a result of heeding to call of the UNSC to stop its nuclear armament activities (White House Removes, 1st par.). The UN Security Council is successful this time in preventing the onset of war to heed a potential threat to world peace and stability. Careful analysis of the events revealed that the economic sanctions placed and the prize for heeding was positively taken by the country concerned. The legality and legitimacy of the steps taken by the Council were all acceptable in the eyes of the world (Enhancing the Implementation, p.3.). No country ran opposite to it as they will also be accordingly punished according to the international law. The only loophole here is why it took about 27 years before North Korea finally realize the advantages of heeding to Security Council resolution. Sufferings of the North Koreans citizens from 1989 to 2008 (The Korean Peninsula, Chronology of Events) could have been prevented if the council is filled with political will at the start of the negotiation. There are other countries in the world which at present, the citizens are suffering from hunger, starvation, human rights violation, ethnic cleansing and neglect from their own government which should protect and take care of them. These countries are Somalia, Zimbabwe, Myanmar and Afghanistan. The Security Council failed to pass the resolution and get the approval of its members for the reason that the issue is sovereign in nature and should be resolved by the country concerned. The other reason is that the issue does not pose as danger to security in the region and world peace and therefore the limited financial resources and manpower of the UN should not be wasted in these activities. Last July 14, a Staff Writer of America.gov website reported that the U.N. Security Council failed to pressure the Zimbabwe government to stop the massacre and ethic cleansing being 7 masterminded by Mugabe regime. (Kaufman, U.N. Security Council). The writer added that the resolution was blocked by veto from Russia, China and South Africa. The BBC News Online confirmed this veto in their news column (BBC News Online, PM Criticizes). The resolution of the Security Council to Sudan to end the human rights violation in Darfur suffered the same fate as in Zimbabwe by veto from China, Algeria, Pakistan and China. The countries against the resolution claimed that the issue is sovereign and does not pose a threat to international peace (Human Rights News, UN Darfur). The threat to democratic process, human rights violation and hunger in Burma will remain as the Security Council resolution to end the pitiful condition was vetoed by China, Russia and South Africa. To them, the issue is sovereign and does not pose hazard to regional and international order. From the foregoing discussions and analysis, it is crystal clear now that The UN Security Council is not at all successful in its activities to preempt war, prevent and end sufferings and give justice to human rights violation and ethic cleansing. It appears that there are loopholes needed to be plugged and filled so that an effective UNSC can be achieved. They are as follows: 1. Strong political will and teeth in implementing sanctions Sanctions are meant to soften the stance of a country so that it will give in to the demand of the Security Council (Shonan,"The Successes"). Strong political will is important in implementation, follow up and determination of how heavy the sanction should be. Clear statement of punishment and gains to the country if the stance soften should be presented well to the subject country and to the UN General Assembly so that veto will be avoided. The North Korea nuclear standoff is an excellent example of strongly implemented sanction. Resolution failures in Myanmar, 8 Sudan and Zimbabwe were inadequately presented resolutions leading to negative Votes, unimplementation and suffering for the country's citizens. 2. Respect for the rule of law Although The UN Security Council is operating under international set of laws, the country that they are helping or sanctioning have their own set of laws and should be respected and obeyed (Chesterman, "Legitimacy,Effectiveness"). This is the reason why the UN Peace Keeping Force cannot just enter a country and go to everywhere they please thus slowing the peace process 3. Increase budget to hire more personnel and peace keeping force One of the reasons for the slow progress of sanctions is lack of follow through by reason of no trained personnel to do it. "Resolutions that create sanctions committees, peacekeeping missions, or peace processes are crucial, but become irrelevant without follow through"( Prendergast and Sullivan, Conclusion, 4th par.). More trained personnel to do follow ups and coordinate with local NGO's on the effect of sanctions will enable UNSC to decide the next action on time. The job and responsibilities of the UN Security Council has increased a hundred fold from its inception to present. Aside from the original responsibility of political stabilizer, the job and expectations now include socio-economic, legal, defender of democratic and human rights. It is just but proper for the council to look back and reflect to what has happened and learn valuable experiences and lessons from them. By so doing, the Security Council will be much stronger and experienced. The council will be respected and its resolutions will be approved if it growls and fight for what is right and just and no superpower can manipulate it if it insist that everybody is equal before the law. 9 Works Cited BBC News Online. "PM Criticizes UN Zimbabwe Failure. BBC. 12 July 2008. 10 August 2008. < http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7503262.stm > Chesterman. "Legitimacy, Effectiveness and Power". Reform of the United Nations. n.d. 9 August 2008. http://www.google.com/searchq=chestermanreport.pdf&sourceid=navclient- ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enPH281PH282 Daragashi, B and R. Mostaghim. "Iran Sanctions Ripple Past Those in Power". The Los Angeles Times LA times.com. 20 January 2008. 6 August 2008. < http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/itsonlyfair/latimes0042.html> "Enhancing the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Sanctions". A symposium: The Permanent Mission of Greece to the United Nations . 30 April 2007. U.N. New York. 06 August 2008. "Failure to Protect: A Call for the UN Security Council to Act in North Korea". US Committee for Human Rights in North Korea. 30 October 2006. 08 August 2008. < http://www.hrnk.org/failureToProtect-Report.pdf> Kaufman, S. "U.N. Security Council Fails to pressure Zimbabwe's Government" America.gov - Telling America's Story . 14 July 2008. 10 August 2008. < http://www.america.gov/st/democracy-english/2008/July/20080714145> Powell, C. "Iraq: Denial and Deception, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell Addresses the U.N. Security Council "The White House. 3 February 2003. 06 August 2008. 10 < http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html Prendergast, J and D. Sullivan. " Irresolution: The UN Security Council on Darfur" Enough. 24 July 2008. 09 August 2008. Shonan. "The Successes and Failures of the UN Security Council". Lecture 4, Global Seminar: The UN's Role in Global Governance. 6 September 2005. 9 August 2008. < http://www.unu.edu/HQ/japanese/gs-j/gs2005j/shonan21/popovski.pdf> "The Korean Peninsula and the World". KBS World: North Korea A to Z. 10 August 2008. 10 August 2008. < http://world.kbs.co.kr/english/event/nkorea_nuclear/news_02.htm> "U.N.: Darfur Resolution a Historic Failure". Human Rights News. 18 September 2004. 10 August 2008. "United Nations Charter". Historical Documents : Episode Comrades. CNN Interactive. n.d. 10 August 2008. < http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/01/documents/un.charter.html> "UN Sanctions Against Iran". Global policy./org. 7 August 2008. < http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/indxiran.htm> "United Nations Security Council". Wikipedia. 10 August 2008. 11 August 2008. "White House Removes North Korea From Terrorist List". North Korea : Nuclear Standoff PBS The Online NewsHour. 26 June 2008. 07 August 2008. < http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/asia/northkorea/index.html> "1991, Mother of All Battles Begun" BBC News Online. 17 January 1991. 07 August 2008. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Read More