ipl-logo

The Argument (Article 42) Of The Security Council

988 Words4 Pages

In case of a war, the Security Council may call upon the Members of the UN to completely or partially interrupt economic relations and sever diplomatic relations . It may do so by ‘air, sea or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security’ . The Members of UN may either use their own armed forces for military operations or merely provide assistance and facilities, including a rite of passage, to the Security Council for the effective execution of the resolution. These actions may take place by reaching a special agreement with the Security Council, or ‘on its call’ . As is often criticized, this Article (42) of the Security Council has been applied rather sparingly. This is mostly so because the gravity …show more content…

In 1950, the authorization of military intervention in Korea lead to the division of the country into North and South where North was the ‘aggressor’ and constituted a breach of the peace . The second implementation of the Article (42) followed the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq resulting in the First Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm) of 1990-1991 . The crackdown of Libyan armed forces against peaceful demonstrations (2011) escalated resulting in the Security Council calling on all member states to ‘take all necessary measures . . . to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in Libyan Arab Jamahiriya’ . Lastly, the violence in Mali (2012) lead by several insurgent groups was addressed by the Security Council upon the request of Transitional authorities of Mali regarding an international military force assisting the Malian Armed Forces in recovering the occupied territories in the north of Mali . Jus in Bello The principle of jus in bello was introduced to regulate war. One could not go to war without having a just reason for doing so. Therefore, the International Humanitarian Law, subdivided into two categories, entail the rules that apply in times of armed conflict. These rules outline a) The kind of weapons that can be used in a combat, and the legitimate targets of an armed attack ; b) The protection of certain categories of persons; wounded and sick …show more content…

An instance of the application of the said provision of Protocol 1 may be seen I the conflict in Sierra Leone (March 1991-Jan 2002). Serious crimes, including the targeting of the civilians were committed during the armed conflict . Consequently, the ‘aggressors’ were brought to the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL). When charged as guilty, the accused claimed that they were fighting against the aggressors with a view to reinstating the lawful government and restoring democracy in the country, and that their ultimate objective was therefore legitimate . The Appeals Court thus looked further into the matter in an attempt to figure out to what extent the, if at all, could the ‘noble intentions’ be called into question. In conclusion, it was decided that ‘it is manifestly incorrect to conclude that widespread or systematic attacks against a civilian population cannot be characterized as crimes against humanity simply because the ultimate objective of the fighting force was legitimate and aimed at responding to the aggressors’ . Consequently, another relevant question was raised: could the noble cause serve as a mitigating factor for the purposes of punishment? In response, the Appeals Chamber argued that ‘any motive taken into consideration as a mitigating factor must be consistent with sentencing purposes, such as individual and general deterrence, affirmative prevention aimed at

Show More
Related
309 Words | 2 Pages

With this morality in both conflicts plays a role in the bombing of cities and villages that contained a high concentration of civilians, where the United States believed the enemy to be stationed. It is here where the concept of body counts comes into play and supports the argument of an unjust, immoral war that defied the concepts held by American Exceptionalism. Tirman uses the example of Vietnam to point out argument, where the bombing strategy of “harassment and interdiction fire” was practiced, where there was no proof that enemy targets were destroyed and in the end did more harm than good as “killed a lot of innocents” to produce a number of supposed enemy casualties” (Tirman, The Real Cost of Vietnam). As in Vietnam the excessive bombings

Read More
1318 Words | 6 Pages

The order was not manifestly unlawful. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly

Read More
477 Words | 2 Pages

The care of civilians during a time of conflict has two arguments Sedgwick’s utility argument and Doctrine of Double Effect or Doctrine of Double Effect prime. I will argue for the Doctrine of Double Effect on the grounds it provide a clear view on what is considering the right actions. While Sidgwicks view allows for all actions to be consider just if framed correctly. Secondly, I will argue that Doctrine of Double Effect prime provides a greater respect to civilians by narrowing its aim. This is due to the update of the Doctrine of Double Effect by Walzer.

Read More
123 Words | 1 Pages

“Libya and the Responsibility to Protect: The Exception and the Norm” by Alex Bellamy discusses the UN Security Council’s Resolutions in response to Libya and the idea of the responsibility to protect. Bellamy specifically discusses Resolution 1973 which called for a no-fly zone over Libya and “all necessary measures” to protect civilians (p. 1). This Resolution deviated from previous ones because it was the first time the Security Council authorized military force for human protection against the wishes of the functioning state (p. 1). Bellamy uses prior resolutions to showcase how Libya is the exception and not the norm. In cases such as Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Security Council had permission of the states to

Read More
221 Words | 1 Pages

This phrase can only be answered through perspective. As all things in history, there are two sides to this. The opinion formulated by this question depends on whether one values the goal or the means used to achieve that goal more. The position in which I take on this is that the ends do not justify the means.

Read More
3675 Words | 15 Pages

PLEADINGS I. REVERENTIA’S ENCOURAGEMENT OF THE EAST AGNOSTICAN REFERNDUM VIOLATED AGNOSTICA’S TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY, THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-INTERVENTION, AND THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER GENERALLY. A. Reverentia’s encouragement constitutes a threat or use of force against the territorial integrity and the political independence of Agnostica. Article 2(4) of the United Nations states, “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.” In the present case Reverentia’s indirect or use of force and the threat or use of force constitutes a violation of the territorial

Read More
1222 Words | 5 Pages

Following the NATO led military force, the UNMIK; UN Security Council Resolution 1244 constituted the binding legal order and hence was providing security and administration to Kosovo. No stand was taken by the UN Security Council resolution 1244 on the final status of Kosovo and leaving the matter for future Security Council decisions, simultaneously the resolution did not impede or prevent a declaration of independence. Though Kosovo's Declaration of Independence was a political matter, it was recognized by powerful states, such as UK, US, France and also most of the Security Council members. Secondly, though Kosovar’s independence was sought outside colonialism and foreign occupation and historical events was clearly indicating that the relationship between Serbia and Kosovo were in effect similar to these contexts.

Read More
978 Words | 4 Pages

Jon Dorbolo of Oregon State University suggested that going to war “...is the basis on which nations seek to legally and morally justify going to war.” There are acceptable reasons why a nation will declare war. It deals with why nations go to war, and it pertains with the conduct of war. Scholars have identified two (2) reasons for the “just war” theory which are known as “Jus Ad Bellum” (the right to go to war) and “Jus In Bello” (the right conduct of war).

Read More
1145 Words | 5 Pages

The rules of jus ad bellum serve as principles to determine when war and the use of violence are justifiable. Only when the criteria of jus ad bellum are met can the use of violent force be permitted (Maiese; 2003). o Last resort: A state may only choose to launch a war if all peaceful settlements do not work. It needs to be made certain, war is only declared when it seems like the last concrete and sensible resolution (Maiese; 2003).

Read More
1214 Words | 5 Pages

Therefore, this paper is designed to illustrate reasons why the UNSC should be reformed. The first and foremost factor to why the UNSC should be reformed is because the veto power used within the council only revolves around the permanent members’ interests. By 1990s, one

Read More
1068 Words | 5 Pages

The just war theory provides us two basic conditions that make it permissible to start or partake in a war justly. The first condition is the “jus ad bellum,” which clarifies when it's just for a state to go to war. The second condition is the “jus in bello” which also elaborates on how soldiers can fight a war justly. The moral responsibilities and constraints of soldiers are stated under these two conditions. Constraints such as the avoidance for a soldier to intentionally harm a civilian is one of the basic principles which combatants from both sides of the war are expected to obey.

Read More
1082 Words | 5 Pages

Section 2: Legal status of UN Peacekeepers As other UN personnel, in the performance of their duties, the UN Peacekeepers enjoy the jurisdictional immunity (§ 1) and the functional immunity (§ 2). § 1. Jurisdictional immunity The following development will mainly look at the theoretical justification of jurisdictional immunity while leaving aside its application or problems related to it, which will be explored in subsequent chapters.

Read More
1519 Words | 7 Pages

To what extent can the bombing of Dresden (1945) be perceived as a war crime according to international law today? The analysis that is set out hereafter presents the case that there is a strong argument that the Dresden bombing CAN be perceived as a war crime. There have always been elements of controversy attached to it for a few important reasons with the main issue of concern being why this city was chosen as a target after five years of war. Some of the reasons proffered are as follows: a)

Read More
1066 Words | 5 Pages

In fact, the United Nations Security Council had given the UNPROFOR to use the force and self-defense mechanisms that could be desirable to them as they sought to accomplish their missions in the region (Miškulin, 2014). Given this, the UNPROFOR had all the power at disposal as it continued to employ measures that were aimed at bringing peace in the region. In Bosnia-Herzegovina and all its towns, planes were instructed to shun away from flying as the measures were still on course. The United

Read More
1135 Words | 5 Pages

Regarding the war crimes, this principle was known gradually as customary international law and has been recognized in the code lieber and directives of Oxford and it has been repeated later in the treaties of international humanitarian law. According to the constitutions of the International Military Tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo and so on, individual criminal responsibility for war crimes was considered as the basis of prosecutions. And many of the suspects of war crimes were tried on the basis of the principle. The given principle was also approved based on the official statements and the reported procedures and has been referred in many Security Council resolutions and has been known as a customary rule of applicable international law in the states '

Read More

More about The Argument (Article 42) Of The Security Council

Related Topics

Open Document