Evaluate The Effectiveness Of Un In International Law

The UN has an agreement with all other nation states to not get in conflict with each other and to settle differences in meetings to prevent another world war. It also makes them stronger as a

The structure and power of the UN Security Council is a major factor regarding how some states are able to exert power over the UN. For example, any permanent member of the UNSC (China, Russia, the US, Britain or France) can veto any resolution proposed as they please. As a result of this we have seen much needed resolutions been dropped due to permanent members vetoing due to national interests. In the case of the conflict in Syria, both resolutions proposed by the UNSC were vetoed by Russia and China as they went against their national interests. In this way, the permanent five members are certainly more powerful than the UN. Furthermore, states sovereignty imposes limits on the extent to which the UN can protect human rights. States sovereignty can also mean that states can refuse to sign international agreements that are seen as against their national interests. For example, the US’s refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Nevertheless, the UN does exhibit some power over states. It can authorise the use of force or peacekeepers or economic sanctions against states where internal conflict has occurred. For example, in 2006 the UNSC authorised the use of peacekeeping troops in Sudan in response to the conflict in Darfur. Similarly in 2011, the UNSC authorised the use of force to protect civilians against the attacks of the Gaddafi regime. Conclusively, although the UN has the ability to authorise various

DESCRIPTION: The United Nations is an international organization established to promote intercontinental support. Therefore, the main role of the United Nations is to maintain international peace and security, to develop friendly relations among nations, to promote respect for human rights and to coordinate aid in disaster situations and to provide help on global issues such as drug trafficking and the environment.

The United Nations failed Rwanda, in a time of need they abandoned the Rwandan people giving them no physical protection. Sadly, things go wrong with the slaughter of almost 800,000 Rwanda people, left defenseless in a country where no one outside cared. U.N. troops were present as only “peace-keepers.” The dispute was between the Hutus and Tutsis people could of been controlled if the U.N. changed their position, but the result could bring more consequences. This conflict between the two social groups in Rwanda,was left to be resolved on its own with many lives lost.

The UN and the US government are accredited for deploring conflict situations as well as contributing humanitarian aid, and this is what these two organizations did in Rwanda and Darfur. However, the UN did not do anything to punish or prevent the genocides that took place in these two countries. The US government promised to support the peace talk’s agreement in Darfur and hold the perpetrators accountable for their acts. It never kept that promise since nothing has been done. So far, the UN’s Security Council has also failed in its peace keeping mission effeorts, and is instead pressuring Sudan with words only. No solid steps have been made to bring the wrong doers into justice (Shapiro).

The United Nations is a vessel to keep the peace, they work to prevent conflicts, step in and help parties in conflict to make peace; peacekeeping; and creating the conditions to allow peace. The UN security council has the primary responsibility for the aforementioned. They are the division of the UN that is responsible for maintaining international peace and security. There are fifteen members and each member has one vote, and under the charter, all Member States are obligated to comply with the council’s decisions (The United Nations, n.d.). The United Nations along with the security council was formed in 1945, leaders of 50 nations met in San Francisco with representatives of non-government organizations. It took place at the end of the second world war to prevent that type of widespread destruction, they formed the United Nations.

For example, as the events of the Darfur genocide unfolded, member nations pressured the UN to call it a genocide, obligating it to act, yet refused to provide it with the essential military and financial support. As Gérard Prunier, author of Darfur: The Ambiguous Genocide explains, "this situation came to demonstrate the UN's practical limitations in crises where the heavyweight member states do not want to act. Blaming the UN was easy for those who were responsible for its inaction." The United Nations has and continues to accomplish volumes for humanity, but in the face of genocide, the UN is a defunct organization, dependent entirely upon the will of its member nations.

international courts and tribunals may achieve limited success in some areas of the world, it

To support my argument, I will first discuss the evolution of international criminal justice and the ICC. Then I will address my three subsidiary arguments. First, I will argue that the International Criminal Court is effective because it increases accountability of human rights violators. Secondly, I will argue that the existence and use of the court increases disapproval and deterrence which protects human rights making the ICC effective. Third, I will argue that the International Criminal Court is effective because it allows for a universal standard of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour as well as transcends and empowers national jurisdictions. Finally, I will address the counter argument and conclude.

In the pursuit of positive peace for the global community, certain mechanisms are necessary in order to better protect human rights and resolve interstate conflicts. Prior to the events of World War II, a cogent set of laws defining those human rights, much less violations therein were never heard at an international scale. The International Criminal Court has the role as both appellate for justice and voice for peace in the international community but has not yet resolve the contradictory ends of both roles. That contradictory end is that many countries proclaim the necessity of the International Criminal Court as an advocate for conflict resolution and peace advocacy while being resist or outright antagonistic towards the court when their own state has committed those same crimes. To the ends of defending basic universal rights, the International Criminal Court (hereafter ICC) serves that capacity when state level systems cannot or will not act accordingly.

Thus, in this context of a unipolar system dominated by U.S., it is highly unlikely that a great power like U.S., motivated by its relentless pursuit of power and security, would allow itself to be deterred by U.N. resolutions that do not comply with its own interests. This also reflects the realist interpretation of international system which is characterized by anarchy and therefore, it is not considered prudent for a State to entrust its safety and survival on another actor or international institutions such as United Nations.

“ Here is a task truly of, by and for the world, one that should rally nations. The nature of this task however, must be clearly understood; only then can suitable means for accomplishing it be formulated, only then can the role that the United Nations could and should play be appreciated” ( Wilcox/Haviland, 29). There are many international organizations that have been talked about throughout this semester. One of the most important ones is The United Nations. The United Nations was established October 24, 1945, and has since then been impacting the country. The United Nations main purpose according to the lecture notes is “ to provide a global additional structure through which states can sometimes settle conflicts with less reliance on the use of force , for whole purpose of the United Nations is to provide the globe a forum by which countries may settle disputes through this forum peacefully as opposed to relying on a force which has been the case historically” ( Kopalyan, Module 8). Thus meaning The United Nations was set up to handle problems peacefully rather than going to war to try and solve problems. “Powerful economic as well as political forces are at work to bring about a growing integration of the world community, and the United Nations and its related agencies are uniquely fitted to assist in the task” (Wilcox/Haviland,45). This was some of the reason that the United Nations was created.

The United Nations, with its rigid moral and political limitations against force, has become a benchmark of peace and a social achievement of modern times. From war torn Europe, the United Nations developed from five major powers with an initial goal to prevent the spread of warfare through peaceful means and to establish and maintain fundamental human rights. Through the past fifty years, this organization has broadened its horizons with auxiliary organizations from peace keeping missions to humanitarian aid, to economic development. However, in a modern example of ethnic cleansing, the UN faces new a new role as a bystander as its power is bypassed by NATO forces. The UN, however, promises to be an

The purpose of this paper is to examine the six chapters assigned for this week. First, in Weiss et al.’s first chapter entitled The Theory of UN Collective Security, the authors elaborate on the foundation and purpose of the United Nations serves on a global scale by means of collectivity. Second, chapter four entitled Evolving Security Operations: Kosovo, East Timor, Sierra Leone, Lebanon, Sudan, Cote d’Ivoire, Libya, and Syria, provides specific examples of relations between the United Nations and individual nation-states, the progress the UN has made in developing countries, and how the resistance the UN faces affect the organization as well as the population they serve. Third, chapter ten of Weiss et al.’s book, Sustainable Development as Process: UN Organizations and Norms focuses on the humanitarian efforts of the UN, especially in the focus of establishing self-sufficiency in developing countries. Then the three chapters in Pease’s book, Security, The Environment, and Human Rights and Humanitarian Issues, focus on three key issues facing the international organizations today.

The United Nations is widely regarded and respected as the most powerful institution that promotes international cooperation and human rights action. In theory, actions implemented by and within the United Nations are based on the mutual global goal of protecting international human rights and preventing human sufferings. These actions are constituted through three main mechanisms: the Treaty-based system, the Human Rights Council, and Security Council and Humanitarian Interventions, with the level of confrontation and seriousness in each mechanism increases respectively. While aimed to serve the mutual goal of protecting human rights over the world and have shown some successes, in a world of sovereignty, actions when implemented are in fact grounded by the national interests of each state, including embracing its national sovereignty, concreting its strategic relationships with other states, and enhancing its reputation in the international community. This paper will analyze the successes and failures of each of the three mechanisms of the United Nations regime, through which it aims to prove that when it comes to actions, states focus more on their national, and in some cases, regional interests than on the mutual goal of strengthening human rights throughout the world, thus diminishing the legitimacy of the whole United Nations system.