Human Security Problems And The United Nations

Most countries have more than one political party. At the same time, the countries are always not homogeneous in terms of race, tribe, religion, or economic endowment. Different political parties always hold different political ideologies. The lack of homogeneity in a country equally creates differences in political perspectives. As a result, many political tensions are developed in a country due to the differences. The tensions are responsible for making the existing government feel threatened especially by the opposition party or regions that feel they are not represented in the government. Acts of resistance can be launched against the government as a way of making the government recognize the dissenting voices. When the government feels overwhelmed by the resistance activities, measures such as state terrorism can be undertaken by the government as a way of making the resisting groups back down on their resistance

Throughout the 21st Century, the September 11 terrorist attacks have often been described as “the most devastating terrorist attacks in history”(). However, while the scale of death and destruction that resulted from these attacks was “indeed staggering”(), the millions of people killed by government acts of terror continues to go unnoticed by orthodox terrorism research(). In this case, there is a need to examine the repressive state practices that critical scholars describe as the “single greatest threat to human and societal security”(). While there has been a large number of human rights groups that have contributed to the wide body of literature on political violence(), the overall neglect on the subject is due to “politically biased research”() that rejects the concept of ‘state terrorism’. For instance,

The initiation of the 1980s Turkish Martial Law gave rise and effect to the oppression and unchecked legislative actions of the Turkish government against a member of its minority population, Kurdish citizens. This paper provides a critical analysis of Turkish state political violence towards is Kurdish minority population post 1980. The analysis provides and examination of the “Turkifying” methods used to dissolve Kurdish identity and assimilate citizens of the state to Turkish identities. The assimilation methods and practices led to to human rights violations conducted by the Turkish government and overlooked by the international community. State induced violence topics of discussion include: Kurdish citizen abductions (state “disappearances”), state authorized torture, the examination of the parameters for Legal Decree 430, state detention facilities and response to Kurdish citizen resistance. The conclusive evidence provided in this analysis identifies the Turkish State agenda for state nationalism without respect to civil liberties or international human rights law post 1980.

The United Nations executed its first official peacekeeping mission in 1956, in response to the international controversy sparked by the Suez Crisis. In an effort to alleviate the tension and bring peace to the region, the Canadian Foreign Minister, Lester Pearson, conceived of a plan whereby the United Nations could raise a multinational body of troops and utilize them to impose and keep peace.

An example of positive peace are the UN Millennium Goals and current Sustainable Development Goals. Even though the UN haven't been successful at quenching war or conflict between groups, I would argue that the UN has been successful at promoting positive peace such as social equality, women's right to education, eradication of extreme poverty, ending world hunger etc. According to Galtung, positive peace is defined as "a social condition in which exploitation has been minimized or eradicated" as opposed to negative peace, which is just the absence of war. He mean that positive peace is the absence of structural violence. Based on his definition, I would also argue that the broad definition of human security (protection of the basic necessities

“While some governments lack the capacity to provide security for their minority groups from aggression from dominant groups, others governments are involved in gross human rights violations of its own people; either social classes or ethnic minorities and political dissidents

On December 10, 1948 the United Nations voted into effect the Universal Declaration of Human rights. They wrote this document as a result of the untold horrors that have been encroached on particular minorities under Axis rule in World War 2. So that never again could such horrific mass killings and malicious rulers rise to power. Needless to say while the UN has tried their absolute hardest to enforce these laws throughout the world, they have failed multiple times to save people from horrid tragedies. Now the leaders of the UN and NATO must face how once again their own incompetence has created a crisis, not in some far of patch of land hidden in a corner of the globe, but in their own backyard of Europe. There are no heroes and no villains in this story just people who are trying to do their best to survive in this world and their leaders who have failed them so.

Yes, I see the difference between how the video’s author defined the list compared to the official statement. In the official list there is the preamble and different articles involved. These things are all involved when it comes to human rights. These things help when it comes to Just War Theory, human rights, and United Nations.

After World War I, the victorious Allied nations made many changes in the world. In addition to the punishments Germany received, a peace-keeping organization called the League of Nations was created. Unfortunately, the League failed. Then, after World War II, the Allies created a new organization called the United Nations. The United Nations or UN, for short, by and large was successful and is still in operation today. The UN has a set of guidelines meant to be applied in every area of the world; one of which is the policy of human rights, created in 1948. The United Nations’ set of human rights values should be in place in every nation in the world. Unfortunately, women in Islamic countries such as Iran and Indonesia are violations of

The question that states that the international human rights regime does not have a hard enforcement mechanism and until there are serious consequences to violations, states won’t comply with human rights is a topic I happen to disagree with. I realize the international human rights regime has its weaknesses and flaws. However, these weaknesses are due to inescapable aspects of our disordered global society, especially the principle of state sovereignty. At the end of World War II there was a change in the internationals view towards human rights. In spite of the large human cost of their failings, these enforcement mechanisms are fit for a purpose and that the strongest enforcement mechanism is simply the fact that human rights are codified in international law. When discussing the topic of compliance and legal strength of human rights instruments and tools, we are talking about nation states. To support my claims we can look at the UN Charter- based enforcement mechanisms. There are two types of these instruments: declarations and conventions. Declarations are not legally binding but do have political impact. Conventions are legally binding under international law. Both declarations and conventions can become expected international law over time, which makes them universally legally binding. A further characteristic is made between mechanisms for human rights protection. They are known as global and regional. The legal instruments

The United Nations was designed to promote peace by preventing future global conflicts between the two great powers (Trachman, 2005, p. 382). Since then, the United Nations has made peacekeeping operations acceptable to member states who would not otherwise have accepted foreign troops on their territory on the auspice of breaching their sovereignty (Goulding, 1993, p. 454). Since then the United Nations Peacekeeping operations has expanded to six different types of operations. Preventive deployment, traditional peacekeeping, implementation of a comprehensive settlement, humanitarian relief protection, institutional assistance and ceasefire enforcement are all applied now by the United Nations (Goulding, 1993, p. 460). And to think, the word “peacekeeping” does not even appear in the 1945 charter.

The supporting and advocating on behalf of human rights has been one of the primary principles of the United Nations. Since its founding in 1945, the United Nations has worked to preserve the basic human rights and fundamental freedoms it believes to be deserved of by every man, woman, and child on the planet. Throughout the near seventy years of the United Nations’ existence, it has been challenged with an array of questions, events, and claims regarding the possible violation of human rights. In order to combat these claims, the body has established two organizations to deal with matters of human rights. The first being the Commission Human Rights, was the original organization, founded in 1946. The Commission existed

Throughout history, there has always been conflict over several issues; these issues range from land to faith to faith to government and so on. Nonetheless, eventually humans have been able to overcome some of these conflicts in some parts of the world and have been successfully on one or another way. The use of weapon and military techniques through these wars have been one of the first weapons to be use against the enemy. In addition to this, there has always been laws in place to protect others and to maintain a certain regime when it comes to conflict so the world does not go back to the way it was in about a thousand years. The United Nations is an international organization to help the globe to eventually obtain a security council to

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 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.