(R2P) Norm

The legitimate defense of a nation and the responsibility of the Security Council to take actions in the course of maintaining peace within its areas of influence. With the establishment of United Nations and the modernization of war and its materials; the theories and doctrines of the past also needed to evolve. The modern Just war theory in composed of two principles: jus ad bellum, the right to conduct war, and jus in bello, the correct conduct within war. Each principle also has its own set of criteria to follow. Jus ad bellum contains six: Just cause, right intention, proper authority and public declaration, last resort, probability of success, and proportionality. (Orend, 2006)

Article 2 emphasizes the rudimentary importance of sovereignty in international law as almost absolute. This belief has been further demonstrated in General Assembly Resolutions. Resolution 2625, accepts the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. Amongst other considerations, it confirms the importance of the Charter and sovereign equality. General Assembly Resolution 3314, defines aggression and calls upon members to refrain from aggression as well as other uses of force that would not be in compliance with the Charter. It also reinforces the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. Declaration 42/22, the approval of the Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations, once again reaffirms the importance of non-intervention, the importance of peaceful relations and the necessity for peaceful means to be used in conflict resolution because a) the risks and concerns associated with conflict and more importantly in this

Ever since the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 was adopted in October of 2000, some of member states have endeavored to implement the resolution nationally.

But as these conflicts have shown, laws of war do not “restrain” conflict, but rather prioritize military necessity over human life. War law has facilitated violence, through the use of the law, violence circumvents humanism and becomes legitmized. As each decade and century goes on, we see optimistic signs of states unifying to condemn violence and signing pacts and conventions which at face value appear to be a sign of the decrease in the ever- increasing savagery of warfare. Jochnick and Norman again explain this paradox very well, in that in lie in the ulterior motives of those who formulate and practice the laws of war versus the idealistic individuals who simply call for it. Governments, lawyer, diplomats and soldiers who often oversee these conventions and pacts again prioritize their sovereign authority during laws creation. No state, regardless of their ambitions is willing to agree to restrictions to deploy the necessary military power to defend their national interests. The vital point here is national interests, not simply defending the state or its boundaries. The Geneva Conventions are often characterized as strict and non-negotiable, the Hague laws are vague and weak, enabling easy loopholes and abuses to be justified under its oversight by states. The United States, United Kingdom, and France were one of the original 26 creators of the Hague Conventions, again it is no surprise that many of the global powers of the 19th and 20th century sought create a legal jurisprudence that enabled certain concessions by other states, but also created easy loopholes that could be exploited by their hegemonic power and global influence. This also has the falls into what I had previously noted. was the Westernized notion of law and legal practices. An act

The debate of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect have been discussed in international relations discourse more seriously within the last 60 years. The major historical developments which have led to an increase in the intensity of these debates have had beneficial and detrimental effects on Earth within the last 20 years. Several factors have contributed to this including; globalization, the rise in international accountability, an increase humanitarian consciousness to prevent major atrocities from occurring, the expansion of territorial to global responsibility of the western world, and the realization of the western world that regional sovereignty no longer accounts for national security. To develop an opinion

There must be a just cause when resorting to war. This can imply either self-defence actions or be fought in order to provide humanitarian aid to the victims of aggression.

Redefine the importance of economic sanctions and collective diplomacy of UN and regional organisations : Targeted sanctions to deter or end violence, expert panels to monitor the effectiveness of targeted sanctions on peace spoilers, and an increase in the use of special envoys and special representatives to the secretary-general. Actively support EU, AU , OAS, ASEAN in promoting regional peace Although conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan consumed the majority of international attention and resources over the past decade, there has been success involving multilateral conflict prevention, peacekeeping, and peace-building

1. 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 internal law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

The United Nations General Assembly, on 24th September 2012, held a High-level meeting on the Rule of Law at both international and national levels, a declaration adopted in that meeting and recognized by the

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.

International law is the set of rules generally regarded and accepted as binding in relations between states, to the maintenance of international peace and security. Although, some of the country may agree to definition of international norms, there are some countries that does not agree with the United Nation international laws that generally accepted as international norms. Even though, some country does not agree with UN international laws, because of the powerful nation that are the member of the nation, the Security Council can enforce their international law via various ways toward a state or individual; and the International court of Justice (ICJ) also give advisory opinion to get settle between state to state conflict, in accordance with international law.

The United Nations is acknowledged as an organization that is tasked with protecting civilians and ensures that international peace is maintained. The articles being discussed in this essay speak about the different ways justice adheres to society through the United Nations. The lead article, United Nations Peacekeeping and Civilian Protection in War, contemplates on the challenges the UN encounters which results in many failures and successes (as mentioned in the article). In the article, the authors argues using empirical data about the fact that the UN is an effective mechanism of civilian protection.

A growing discussion amongst IR scholars and International legal scholars alike has been the debate on if International law (IL) is really law especially since it lacks the basic characteristics of domestic law. Is international law a law just in name or in action also? If it is a law, do states obey this Law? And why will it be in the interest of a state to obey such law (if it does exist). This essay is an attempt to explain what IL is and to point out likely reasons why it is in a state interest to obey IL. This essay is drawn largely from work written by various scholars at different times to draw my conclusion

The objective of the paper is to review the development of United Nations’ peacekeeping forces. After World War II, the United Nations had been given new opportunities to help control and resolve conflicts. As a result, new tasks and new method had to be adopted in order to adapt the fast world changing situation and continue growing conflicts which could endanger the international peace. Therefore, the UN peacekeeping forces play a very important role in keeping peace in conflict regions. This paper also examines some crisis UN is now facing. It examines whether state participation in UN peace-keeping results from a state 's idealistic commitment to the global community and international peace or whether participation is tied to the state 's national interest. With the high profile of UN peace-keeping in this post-Cold War era, the answer to this inquiry may suggest to us whether the emerging international system will be organized on the principles of community or self.

We have thus far acknowledged, via several examples, based on the politics involved in the process of mutual recognition of states, that the issue of international legal sovereignty or international legal validation is a de facto versus de jure consideration. Is this, however, a trend in the legal procedures in international relations? The law, based on our previously defined definition, must be applicable to the actors in the community in which it is operating. If, in the realm of international relations, the law can be voluntarily and regularly flouted by