UN Charter Flashcards
UN Charter
-The Charter reaffirms the Westphalian foundations of the international system by recognizing the sovereign equality of States and non-interference in the domestic affairs of States as two of its general principles.
- There are 51 original members to the Charter, which are the States that signed the treaty at the San Francisco Conference in 1945 (and Poland).
- The Charter has as one of its main general objectives the maintenance of international peace and security.
- Any of the permanent members of the Security Council can unilaterally block the admission, suspension or expulsion of a State.
UN General Assembly
- The General Assembly is the UN’s plenary organ. i.e. all member-States have a permanent seat in it.
- General Assembly resolutions may have an important impact on international law, but they do not directly generate legal obligations.
UN Security Council
- Its two main roles are the promotion of the pacific settlement of disputes and the authorization of enforcement measures.
- Its most important decisions require 9 affirmative votes and should not receive a negative vote from any of its permanent members.
- Its resolutions come in the form of recommendations and decisions; only the latter are legally binding.
- The 10 non-permanent members are elected by the General Assembly for a two-year period and are subject to geographical constraints.
- It has 15 members, of which only 5 have a permanent seat – namely, the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom.
Collective Security
- Collective security refers to an ideal arrangement according to which the unlawful use of force by one State against another will be met by the combined strength of all other States.
- The Security Council can dictate enforcement measures that do not involve the use of armed force and those that do.
- Only exceptionally have acts of aggression been countered with “Article 42” measures.
- The first goal of collective security is not to confront aggressors with a collective response but rather to deter future would-be aggressors.
- UN collective security is principally managed by the Security Council.
Article 39 of the UN Charter
(The security council is allowed to judge if there is a threat to the peace and do something about it)
The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Article 41 of the UN Charter
(Non-use of force for compliance)
The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.
Article 42 of the UN Charter
(Use of force for compliance)
Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockades, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.
What is the difference between Peacekeeping (PKOs) and Peace-Enforcement (PEO) operations?
- PKOs are not intended to favour any particular outcome of the bargaining process between the disputing parties; PEOs are.
- PKOs are usually welcome by all parties in a conflict; PEOs are not.
- PKOs and PEOs can be authorized by the Security Council.
- PKOs pre-suppose a cease-fire – even if a fragile one; PEOs do not.
- PEOs imply active military fighting against one of the sides in the conflict; PKOs do not.
How can International Law Compliance be explained?
- States comply with international law in order to build a reputation as a reliable partner, which is a long-term strategy to secure the benefits of (future) international cooperation.
- States comply with international law in order to secure reciprocal compliance by others.
- States comply with international law because it is enforced by stakeholders through domestic courts and other domestic institutions.
- States comply with international law in order to avoid the retaliatory sanctions imposed by others when international law is breached.
- States comply with international law because they are persuaded to do so by normative arguments, and, ultimately, socialized into internalizing the norms reflected in the law.
International Law Enforcement
- UN-sanctioned coordinated enforcement, such as multilateral interventions, are rare.
- Countermeasures are acts of unilateral law enforcement made in response to a prior internationally wrongful act; they require legal justification because they would constitute wrongful acts in otherwise normal circumstances.
- Retorsion is a method of unilateral law enforcement that takes the form of an act which is legally permissible.
International War
- The Covenant of the League of Nations did not outlaw war.
- Waging war was a legitimate policy option for sovereign States for most of Westphalian history.
- The 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact was the first general prohibition of war for States.
- Both the League of Nations and the United Nations set up a collective security mechanism for States.
- The United Nations Charter forbids the use of force between States, with some exceptions.
Preventive Self-Defence
A state using force against another State as a response to an armed attack estimated to occur in the future.
- Not legally justifiable
Individual Self-Defence
A state using force against another state that carried out an armed attack against it.
Collective Self-Defence
A state using force against another state that carried out an armed attack against a third state.
Pre-emptive Self-Defence
A state using force against another state as a response to an imminent armed attack by the latter.