Holding Nations Accountable For Aggressive Actions

Powerful Essays
The United Nations’ Security Council whose five members hold veto power defines aggression. If any of these members chooses to not recognize an aggressor, then the UN is powerless to proceed against said aggressor. Because these states primary interests are not always in line with the best interests of the global community, aggression is likely to be defined in terms of political benefits to countries. States may choose not to enter into a conflict because of the strain it will put upon its military capabilities, which would lead to the weakening of the state’s defenses. The military plays a large role in the economy of many nations. Canada for example, produces a great deal of weapons but sells the majority to other nations. Through this, Canada benefits economically from war as long as it does not have to enter into conflict itself. The UN tries to act as a multilateral force but is influenced significantly by the United States. The United States provides the majority of the United Nations’ funding. If the United States does not allow for a state to be defined as an aggressor, it is nearly impossible for the UN to take action. The United States can allow for a state to designate an aggressor to appease political pressures, but then withhold funding, preventing the UN from taking larger steps to repel or punish aggressors. Political pressures play the greatest role in influencing states on how to define aggression because no matter how large a state, it cannot maintain power without the political support of other states and the states people. However, the U.S. does its best to get away without approval from the other members of the Security Council. When states are dealing with political issues, they must tread light...

... middle of paper ...

...the very nature of its controlling members being dishonest. It seems as though aggression will always be defined by political standards and not humanitarian or other standards. Economic systems are driven by political actions and the development and success of those systems allows for the creation of additional military development. As military forces increase in number and sophistication, the great powers of the world will use the capabilities of their military to pursue their own goals. The power of the world rests in the hands of a small number of politicians who have the ability to lie to their people and attack whomever they please without disciplinary action from the UN. In a world where politicians wield the power to create the reality their people see, is there any hope for people to hold the great powers accountable for their aggressive actions?
Get Access