The United Nations Security Council is in desperate need of reform because of the current dysfunction which surrounds it. Any suggestion of reform could be idealistic. To not enlarge the Security Council is an option too. Over the years, proposals on the reform of the Security Council have included the enlargement of the Security Council, changes to the categories or proportions of membership of the Security Council, the addition of Regional Representatives and changes to the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly. Another option for veto reform is to abolish the veto over resolutions concerning genocide and other crimes against humanity. Various international relations perspectives, including Idealists, Liberals, Marxists and Realists, align with each of these proposals. The best hope for the future lies in the expansion of Security Council members and possibly some control over the exercise of veto power by Security Council members.
It may be argued that any suggestion for reformation of the United Nations Security Council is by definition idealistic. The charter of the United Nations way shaped by the major victors in the Second World War and, not surprisingly, was shipped in their national interests. Any resolution that would effectively reduce the power of the resulting five permanent members of the Security Council - “China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States” (United Nations Security Counsel, “Members of the United Nations Security Counsel.” Unknown.), often referred to as the “P5”, would likely be opposed by them since it would reduce their power. And it would be effectively opposed, since they have the power to veto any such resolution. Similarly, any res...
... middle of paper ...
...l Representatives and changes to the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly. An option for veto reform is to abolish the veto over resolutions concerning genocide and other crimes against humanity. Various international relations perspectives, including Idealists, Liberals, Marxists and Realists, align with each of these proposals. The most effective option is an expansion of the Security Council and possibly some control over the exercise of veto power by Security Council members.
Works Cited
Holland, Francois. “Security Council Reform.” France at the United Nations. Unknown. Web. April 2014.
Goodenough, Patrick. “Security Council Must Stop Using Veto in Cases of Genocide, Group Says.” Global Policy Forum. December 2008. Web. April 2014.
Oxford University Press. “Introduction to Politics” Brief Second Edition. Textbook. April 2014.
Stanton, Gregory H. "Genocides and Conflicts." World Without Genocide. World Without Genocide, 7 May 2013. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. .
The physical and mental intent to destroy another being often unveils the darkest side of human nature. In the memoir, “An Ordinary Man: An Autobiography” dedicated to the Rwandan genocide, war hero Paul Rusesabagina states: “A sad truth of human nature is that it is hard to care for people when they are abstractions, hard to care when it is not you or somebody close to you. Unless the world community can stop finding ways to dither in the face of this monstrous threat to humanity those words never again will persist in being one of the most abused phrases in the English language and one of the greatest lies of our time.” The United Nations promised never again would they allow genocide to occur after the Second World War. Unfortunately, less
Genocide is a pressing issue with a multitude of questions and debates surrounding it. It is the opinion of many people that the United Nations should not get involved with or try to stop ongoing genocide because of costs or impositions on the rights of a country, but what about the rights of an individual? The UN should get involved in human rights crimes that may lead to genocide to prevent millions of deaths, save money on humanitarian aid and clean up, and fulfill their responsibilities to stop such crimes. It is preferable to stop genocide before it occurs through diplomacy, but if necessary, military force may be used as a last resort. Navi Pillay, Human Rights High Commissioner, stated, “Concerted efforts by the international community at critical moments in time could prevent the escalation of violence into genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing.”
The idea of intervention is either favoured or in question due to multiple circumstances where intervening in other states has had positive or negative outcomes. The General Assembly was arguing the right of a state to intervene with the knowledge that that state has purpose for intervention and has a plan to put forth when trying to resolve conflicts with the state in question. The GA argues this because intervention is necessary. This resolution focuses solely on the basis of protection of Human Rights. The General Assembly recognizes that countries who are not super powers eventually need intervening. They do not want states to do nothing because the state in question for intervening will continue to fall in the hands of corruption while nothing gets done. The GA opposed foreign intervention, but with our topic it points out that intervention is a necessity when the outcome could potentially solve conflicts and issues. In many cases intervention is necessary to protect Human Rights. For instance; several governments around the world do not privilege their citizens with basic Human Rights. These citizens in turn rely on the inter...
- Specifically state to the reader if there was U.N. intervention, could genocide have been avoided?
The League of Nations was an Intergovernmental Organisation which persisted from 1919 up until 1946 where it was formally replaced with the United Nations towards the end of the Second World War. Many consider the League as one of the International Systems greatest failures due to it being widely regarded as an ‘ineffective instrument to tackle aggressors’ (Catterall, 1999, p. 52) and its inherent failure to prevent international conflict. However,
...ociation of independent countries that have agreed to work together to prevent and end wars” in the article United Nations. Positives are promoted by the UN in attempt to improve global social conditions such as international cooperation, economic development, and humans rights. Problems are to be resolved peacefully and diplomatically rather than relying on force. Lemkin brought forth the idea for the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; The United Nations adopted it. The agreement states that acts or intents of genocide are considered crimes under international law, and nations need to work to prevent and punish such acts. Author Richard Rupp informs us in his article Genocide that “In 1998, the UN’s International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda became the first international court to pass a guilty verdict for the crime of genocide”.
For the past several months the United Nations’ Security Council has debated on whether or not to accept the U.S. proposal to force Iraq to comply the new and former resolutions. The new resolution calls for complete disarmament of Iraq and the re-entrance of weapons inspectors into Iraq. If Iraq fails to comply, then military force would be taken in order to disarm Iraq. This proposal met opposition from council members Russia, China, and France. They thought that the U.S. proposal was too aggressive and that the U.S. should not act alone without U.N. approval. For weeks they refused to believe that the only way to make Iraq disarm is through the threat of force and the fear of being wiped out.
Nothing in life is black and white; there will always be some sort of grey area to debate whether something is good or bad, helpful or harmful, or if the reward is greater than the punishment. This holds true for the UN Security Council and its members’ vetoing powers because the power granted by the veto makes it so that the top dogs so-to-speak have the ultimate say in matters regarding the world. Of course, in some cases this is incredibly important, but when it comes to the “pet projects” there seems to be great debate. With any threat of losing power, any of the five countries with the veto power can destroy any chance of change in a “pet” nation. With China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States all
Scheffer, David J. "Responding To Genocide And Crimes Against Humanity." U.S. Department Of State Dispatch 9.4 (1998): 20. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 19 Dec. 2011. .
1. As far as peace keeping methods go, the reputation of the United Nations is very pitiable. This is not only because they have not been doing their job to it’s fullest extent, but also because the member states on the security council haven’t given the UN the power it needs if it is to be a successful force in peace keeping methods.
United Human Rights Council. (2014). Genocide in Rwanda. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/genocide_in_rwanda.htm [Accessed: 21 Feb 2014].
Print. The. Hymowitz, Sarah, and Amelia Parker. " Lessons - The Genocide Teaching Project - Center for Human Rights & Humanitarian Law." American University, Washington College of Law. American UniversityWashington College of Law Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, 2011.
“In addition, State Minister Kiuchi mentioned the importance of North Korea refraining from further provocations and taking steps for denuclearization, and of all countries fulfilling Security Council resolutions, along with seeking the understanding and cooperation of the ASEAN member countries for the resolution of the abductions issue. Furthermore, State Minister Kiuchi explained the importance of achieving concrete results in UN Security Council reform this year, the 70th anniversary of the founding of the
Fifty-one countries established the United Nations also known as the UN on October 24, 1945 with the intentions of preserving peace through international cooperation and collective security. Over the years the UN has grown in numbers to include 185 countries, thus making the organization and its family of agencies the largest in an effort to promote world stability. Since 1954 the UN and its organizations have received the Nobel Peace Prize on 5 separate occasions. The first in 1954 awarded to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, for its assistance to refugees, and finally in 1988 to the United Nations Peace-keeping Forces, for its peace-keeping operations. As you can see, the United Nations efforts have not gone without notice.