An essay "International Law and Institutions" reports that all Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations…
The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Since the 1990s not only has the Security Council agreed to authorize humanitarian intervention, there have also been interventions without authorization from the Security Council such as the intervention in Northern Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Haiti, Yugoslavia/Kosovo and East Timor. These latter interventions have arisen as a result of a perception of the Security Council’s failure to act or ineffective action where there has been concern about the severe deprivation of human rights. For example, the failure of the UN to broker political peace in Somalia led to the US Operation Restore Hope in 1992, which for the first time in American history, saw American troops committed to a military operation for a cause completely unrelated to protecting their national interest. The operation’s goal was to open supply routes for food relief efforts and prepare the way for a UN peacekeeping force to preserve the security of these routes. The challenge, it seems, must be to leave open the option for humanitarian intervention in extreme cases of human suffering, where the reasons for action seem morally imperative and politically sound but the Security Council is unable to act, while at the same time to avoid jeopardising in a fundamental way the existing, hard-earned, international legal order, including the central role of the Security Council. ...
must be to leave open the option for humanitarian intervention in extreme cases of human suffering, where the reasons for action seem morally imperative and politically sound but the Security Council is unable to act, while at the same time to avoid jeopardising in a fundamental way the existing, hard-earned, international legal order, including the central role of the Security Council.1
The Security Council is bound by the Charter. However as the US has cogently argued the Charter is too narrow. It envisaged only those situations where a state might call on the help of the international community or where international peace was threatened. It did not take into account the situations observed since then in the killing fields of Cambodia, Rwanda and Srebrenica. In 2004, 10 years after the genocide in Rwanda, the Canadian Foreign Minister, Bill Graham was reported by the BBC to have said:
We lack the political will to achieve the necessary agreement on how to put in place the type of measures that will prevent a future Rwanda from happening2
Although the primary responsibility lies with the state, where a population is suffering serious harm, as a result of internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure, and the state in question is unwilling or unable to halt or avert it, the principle of non-intervention should lead to a larger principle, that of the international responsibility to protect3.
There are essentially 2 criticisms of the UN: its relevance and its structure. As can be seen from the US ignoring the UN over Iraq and the UN's admission of failing to act in time to the obvious threat in Rwanda, there are many reasons for questioning its relevance. Its structure goes back to 1945 where the victorious powers of World War II decided to stamp their ...
Cite this document
(“International Law and Institutions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/politics/271912-international-law-and-institutions
(International Law and Institutions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words)
“International Law and Institutions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/politics/271912-international-law-and-institutions.
China is one of the most powerful countries in the world today with respect to almost any aspect of growth, development and its people. The country has made various amendments in its strategic thinking and requirements in order to deem fit with the rest of the world and emerge on top.
“Self-determination is the historic root from which the democratic entitlement grew”. The deep-rootedness of democratic entitlement confers vital elements of legitimacy on self-determination, as well as on the two newer branches of the entitlement: freedom of expression and electoral right.
Due to the ever increasing complexity of the global economy, as well as the need for checks and balances to ensure that international business and trade are conducted in an ethical and beneficial manner, international organizations have rose to prominence which were created in an effort to serve as arbiters in commerce and trade disputes that cross the boundaries of nations, oceans and continents.
While there are pacifists and probably the vast majority of the world's citizens, who would like it to be otherwise, the fact is that international law, in the final analysis, is more accurately concerned with the regulation of the use of force, rather than its absolute prevention.3 That is why, although there is a general overarching obligation on states to refrain from the use of force in settling disputes, there are exceptions to this rule.
l law is complicated by the very special nature of objective –subjective content of the rule’1 In terms of subjectivity those who gain are the constituencies of states. In terms of objectivity it is not just the question of the enjoyment and exercise by individuals or groups
All this has also helped the country to become an independent power in the eyes of the rest of the world with time as well.
The foreign or international policy of this country is the policy or theory by way of which it interacts with other nations and also the outlook
Moreover, governments are always anxious to prevent restrains that influence international law. They prevent the restrains because of the huge effect that it brings in their international politics. Other realists do not
Given that Iran’s attitude towards Jewish states remains negative; there is a chance that Israel may disrupt Iran’s capabilities of nuclear strength. The Persian Gulf War in 1991 gave the U.S. and alliance forces challenges in facing nuclear weapons (Shipley