scholarly journals What Does the Uniting for Peace Resolution Mean for the Role of the UN Security Council?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 118-122
Author(s):  
Ieva Miluna
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Constant Control ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Normative Role

The Uniting for Peace resolution together with the UN Charter prescribes a certain role for the General Assembly with regard to international peace and security. Larry Johnson addresses that role, but he does not consider a second question: how does the Uniting for Peace resolution affect the UN Security Council? The normative role of the Council is influenced not only by the Charter, but also by general international law. In this comment, I explore the normative role of the Council in fulfilling the Charter’s purpose to maintain international peace and security. I argue that the text of the Charter and the prior practice of both the Assembly and the Council help to determine the proper division of these organs’ respective tasks within the Charter system. I conclude that the Council alone exercises the constant control needed to enforce measures of collective security effectively, and that the Assembly is limited to recommending the consequences for states when threats or breaches of the peace occur.

United Nations and Regional Organizations: Complementarity v. Subsidiarity

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alena F. Douhan
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Regional Organizations ◽  
Universal System ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
New System

The United Nations organization was planned to be established as a single universal system of collective security. Major efforts were supposed to be taken by the UN Security Council. Regional organizations were introduced into the system as a subordinate subsidiary means – elements of the system. Over the course of the time it has, however, appeared that the UN Security Council was not able to act in the way prescribed by the UN Charter in suppressing newly emerged threats and challenges in the sphere of security. In the contrary, the role of regional organizations has increased substantially. They do the majority of tasks in the sphere of maintenance of international peace and security, often without authorization or even informing the UN Security Council, although the legality of some of these actions may be dubious. As a result, the Council itself transfers the accent in relations between the UN and regional organizations from subsidiarity to complementarity or even partnership. It is thus necessary to re-check the meaning of the concepts of complementarity and subsidiarity as well as the UN Charter provisions in the changed circumstances and to specify principles of the new system.

scholarly journals The Relationship between the Un Security Council and General Assembly in Matters of International Peace and Security

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel D. White
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the division of competence between the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly concerning matters of international peace and security but placed within the context of the prohibition on the use of force. Although the Security Council can authorize the use of force by states, what is not clear is whether the General Assembly can recommend that states take military action. The chapter considers the conundrum faced by the United Nations with respect to an imminent and catastrophic use of force or act of egregious violence, when the UN Security Council is deadlocked because of the lack of agreement between the permanent members. It discusses the debate over the legality of the (in)famous Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950 within the context of the emerging principle of a Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as well as within existing principles of international law.

Adoption of 1325 Resolution

2018 ◽  
pp. 25-37
Author(s):  
Christine Chinkin
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Real Possibility ◽  
Policy Initiatives ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Oriented Approach

UN Security Council Resolution 1325 was not adopted in a vacuum, but rather can be read with a number of other programs within the Security Council (SC) and UN architecture. These include other thematic resolutions, as well as broader policy initiatives. Taken together, these diverse strands sought to shift the understanding of the SC’s role in the maintenance of international peace and security, away from a classic state-oriented approach to one that places people at its center. The adoption of Resolution 1325, along with these other developments, had implications for the making of international law (the place of civil society and experts within the international legal and institutional framework), for rethinking participation, and the meaning of security/protection. This chapter suggests that 2000 was a pivotal moment when a more human-oriented international law seemed a real possibility and before the turn back toward militarism and national security in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

scholarly journals Uniting for “Peace” in the Second Cold War: A Response to Larry Johnson

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 129-134
Author(s):  
Boris N. Mamlyuk
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
General Assembly Resolution ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
Legal Justification

Larry Johnson’s timely and important essay challenges both utopian and realist accounts of UN law and practice by reviving the debate over the nature and functions of the UN General Assembly, particularly the General Assembly’s power to deploy certain legal tactics not only to influence collective security deliberations in the UN Security Council, but also, more significantly, to provide some legal justification for multilateral military “collective measures” in the event of Security Council gridlock. One vehicle by which the General Assembly may assert its own right to intervene in defense of “international peace and security” is a “Uniting for Peace” (UFP) resolution, authorized by resolution 377(V) (1950). At its core, a “uniting for peace” resolution is an attempt to circumvent a Security Council deadlock by authorizing Member States to take collective action, including the use of force, in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. General Assembly resolution 377(V) does not require resolutions to take specific legal form—language that echoes the preambular “lack of unanimity of the permanent members [that results in the Security Council failing to] exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security” is sufficient to render a given resolution a UFP, provided the General Assembly resolution calls for concrete “collective [forceful] measures.” For this reason, experts disagree on precisely how many times a UFP has indeed been invoked or implemented, although informed analysts suggest UFP has been invoked in slightly more than ten instances since 1950.

scholarly journals COVID-19 and the Scope of the UN Security Council’s Mandate to Address Non-Traditional Threats to International Peace and Security

2021 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-146
Author(s):  
Erin Pobjie
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Security Framework ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Climate Crisis ◽  
First Time

In Resolution 2532 (2020), the UN Security Council characterised the COVID-19 pandemic as an endangerment to international peace and security and, for the first time, demanded a general ceasefire and humanitarian pause in armed conflicts across the globe. This article analyses the resolution and its broader implications. In particular, it examines the significance of the Council’s characterisation of the COVID-19 pandemic, the binding powers of the Security Council for addressing threats to international peace and security which are not ‘threats to the peace’, and the implications for the Council’s mandate and the collective security framework. This article argues that the concept of ‘international peace and security’ under Article 24(1) of the United Nations (UN) Charter – rather than Article 39 ‘threats to the peace’ – is fundamental to the delimitation of the Security Council’s mandate and powers for addressing non-traditional threats to international peace and security such as pandemics and the climate crisis.

scholarly journals Evolution ‎of Asset-Freezing through the UN Security Council

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Gasem M.S Al-Own ◽  
Maysa Said Bydoon
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security

<p>The UN Security Council (UNSC) carries out its task in maintaing and restoring international peace and security. However, it is argued that the Security Council evolved new ways to maintain international peace and security that differ from what was originally intended when the UN Charter adopted in 1945. The Development of Asset-freezing could be considered as an example of this evolution. This Article analyses the historic evolution ‎of asset-freezing in the UN legal order by the UNSC to identify the changes in the nature of asset-freezing. This article argues that asset-freezing has been designed as a means to put pressure on states to abide by the orders of the UNSC for the purpose of maintaining international collective security.</p>

scholarly journals ACTIVITIES OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A SET OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY MEASURES IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA IN THE PERIOD FROM 1991 TO 1992

2020 ◽  
Vol VI (1-2) ◽  
pp. 61-111
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The Republic

United Nations (UN) organs have the primary responsibility in the collective security system. The UN Security Council is a body with broad responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security. Accordingly, this body makes recommendations and decisions with the aim of establishing international peace and security. It also enacts measures that do not involve, but also those that involve the use of armed force. In relation to the Security Council, the UN General Assembly has a subsidiary role in the maintenance of international peace and security. The Republic of Austria was a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council from 1990 to 1992. It was important for Austria that the UN system of collective security functions properly, having in mind the fact that the territory of the former Yugoslavia is in its immediate vicinity, as well as the fact that the basic principles of international law were violated, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this regard, the officials of the Republic of Austria at the United Nations initiated, participated in the preparation and voting of several UN Security Council resolutions with the aim of implementing certain collective security measures in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The most important acts related to the implementation of the set of collective security measures adopted by the United Nations organs with the strong involvement of the Republic of Austria are: UN Security Council Resolutions 749 and 752 (activities of the Republic of Austria in stopping the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina at an early stage), UN Security Council Resolutions 757 (economic sanctions against FR Yugoslavia), UN Security Council Resolution 761 (sending UNPROFOR to Sarajevo Airport), UN Security Council Resolution 764 (proposal to impose coercive measures), Council Resolutions 770 and 771 UN Security Council (delivery of humanitarian aid to Bosnia and Herzegovina and its right to self-defense), UN Security Council Resolution 779 (right to return the refugees), UN Security Council Resolution 781 (establishment of a no-fly zone), Security Council Resolution 787 UN (proposal for the establishment of protected zones), UN General Assembly Resolutions 48/88 and 49/10 (request for lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina and Herzegovina).

Revisiting the Role of the Security Council Concerning the International Criminal Court’s Crime of Aggression

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Trahan
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Early Warning ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Peace ◽  
State Party ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Un Security Council

Abstract This article revisits the role of the United Nations (UN) Security Council in making referrals of the crime of aggression to the International Criminal Court (ICC). It examines the increase in significance of the role of the Security Council caused by the apparent jurisdictional limitations in the resolution activating the ICC’s jurisdiction over the crime when cases are initiated through State Party referral or proprio motu. Since these jurisdictional limitations seemingly decrease the possibility for ICC crime of aggression cases to be initiated without Security Council referral, they also render the Prosecutor less able to play a role in prevention or providing early warning regarding the crime. This increases the need for the Security Council to fulfil this prevention or early warning function, which is entirely appropriate given the Security Council’s primary responsibility under the UN Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security. The General Assembly may, although to a lesser extent, be able to play a similar role.

Regional Arrangements and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security: The Role of the African Union Peace and Security Council

2011 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 97-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Riziki Majinge
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
African Union ◽  
International Peace ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The United Nations

SummaryThis article examines the role of regional arrangements under the Charter of the United Nations (UN Charter) in the maintenance of international peace and security. The African Union Peace and Security Council (AU PSC), the organ within the AU charged with addressing threats to international peace and security on the African continent, is used as a case study. The author contends that the major challenges facing regional arrangements in exercising mandates under Article 53 of the UN Charter of the United Nations have more to do with inadequate financial and logistical resources than the nature of those mandates. Taking the AU’s role in Somalia, Sudan, and other African countries as examples, the article demonstrates that the AU PSC has failed to achieve its objective of maintaining peace and security precisely because the United Nations (UN) Security Council — a more powerful and better resourced organ — has failed to live up to its responsibility of extending the assistance necessary to enable the AU PSC to perform its functions. Consequently, the author concludes that the UN Security Council, when delegating powers to regional arrangements to maintain international peace and security, should provide adequate resources to such regional arrangements, especially those that will otherwise have minimal or no capacity to fulfil their mandate effectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document