scholarly journals Comment on Larry Johnson, “Uniting for Peace”

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 135-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
General Analysis ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Member States ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Permanent Member ◽  
A Current

Larry Johnson’s essay on the UN General Assembly’s Uniting for Peace resolution (UFP) is a useful general analysis of issues arising from UN Security Council Permanent Member veto-paralysis. His essay, which focuses on the text of the original Resolution, is directed at asking whether the UFP retains a current “useful purpose.” Relying on a text-centric interpretation of the presence or absence of subsequent invocations of the UFP, he concludes that no “useful purpose” remains, in part because evolved General Assembly authority has displaced the need to specifically invoke the UFP to make recommendations on certain issues of international peace and security. Johnson then asks whether, under the original UFP or subsequently, the Assembly may recommend to Member States “enforcement” uses of force, notwithstanding the prohibitions of Article 2(4) of the Charter. He finds Article 2(4) to be an absolute barrier to Assembly authority to recommend those measures, but not for “innovative and inventive non-use-of force measures.”

scholarly journals The Legalizing and Legitimizing Function of UN General Assembly Resolutions

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 123-128
Author(s):  
Stefan Talmon
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Member States ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Permanent Member ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The Government

In his essay on the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, Larry Johnson suggests that the General Assembly can recommend non-use of force collective measures when the Security Council is blocked because of a permanent member casting a veto. He rightly points out that today there is no longer any need to use Uniting for Peace for such recommendations. The General Assembly can and has recommended so-called “voluntary sanctions” in cases where it found a threat to international peace and security to exist. For example, in resolution 2107 (XX) of December 21, 1965 concerning the Question of Territories under Portuguese Administration, the Assembly, making no reference to Uniting for Peace, urged “Member States to take the following measures, separately or collectively:(a)To break off diplomatic and consular relations with the Government of Portugal or refrain from establishing such relations;(b)To close their ports to all vessels flying the Portuguese flag or in the service of Portugal;(c)To prohibit their ships from entering any ports in Portugal and its colonial territories;(d)To refuse landing and transit facilities to all aircraft belonging to or in the service of the Government of Portugal and to companies registered under the laws of Portugal;(e)To boycott all trade with Portugal.”

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.

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 “Uniting for Peace”: Does it Still Serve Any Useful Purpose?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 106-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry D. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The Past ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Permanent Member

During the past several years, vetoes have been cast in the UN Security Council to block draft resolutions aimed at addressing the crises in Syria and Ukraine. Concerning Syria, Russia and China have vetoed three resolutions (the votes were 9-2-4 on October 4, 2011, 13-2-0 on February 4, 2012, and 11-2-2 on July 19, 2012). Concerning Ukraine, Russia vetoed a resolution just recently (the vote was 13-1-1 on March 15, 2014). The same question that arose in 1950 has thus arisen again today: can the General Assembly do anything when the Council is blocked because of a permanent member casting a veto? The answer is “yes.” But the reason is not because of the Assembly’s resolution 377A(V) of November 3, 1950 (“Uniting for Peace”), even though advocates of Assembly action frequently invoke it. Indeed, this resolution is for the most part no longer needed to provide a basis for Assembly “collective measures” recommendations when a veto proscribes the Council’s adoption of such measures. Moreover, the resolution does not provide a basis or justification for the use of force that would not be justified on other grounds, such as self-defense.

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.

scholarly journals Reform of the Backbone of the United Nations

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. p279
Author(s):  
Hanne Christensen
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Social Strategies ◽  
Member States ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Social Causes

This paper outlines what can be done to reform the backbone of the United Nations to further the work of the organization. That is the General Assembly, the Security Council and ECOSOC. It shows that the General Assembly can play a stronger role in international peace and security matters by suggesting peace proposals for potential conflicts, and inform the Security Council if, and when, it is not in agreement with measures taken by the Council. The paper comments on ongoing negotiations on Security Council reform and shows the difficulty of reforming the veto clause. It suggests that ECOSOC deals with both economic and social causes of conflicts and develops macro-economic and macro-social strategies to prevent conflict for the General Assembly to recommend to member states and onwards to the Security Council to act on. Some concrete examples are indicated to that effect.

14. The use of force and collective security

2019 ◽  
pp. 346-374
Author(s):  
Gleider Hernández
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Humanitarian Interventions ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter looks at the use of force and collective security. Today, the United Nations Charter embodies the indispensable principles of international law on the use of force. These include the prohibition on the unilateral use of force found in Article 2(4), and the recognition of the inherent right of all States to use force in self-defence found in Article 51. Finally, under Chapter VII, a collective security system centred upon the Security Council was established for the maintenance of international peace and security. A key debate over the scope of Article 2(4) is whether a new exception has been recognized which would allow the use of force motivated by humanitarian considerations. It is argued that these ‘humanitarian interventions’ would allow a State to use force to protect people in another State from gross and systematic human rights violations when the target State is unwilling or unable to act.

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.

Part III Observance and Application of Treaties, 15 The Law of Treaties and the UN Security Council: Some Reflections

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wood Sir Michael
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Important Distinction ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The Law ◽  
Harsh Criticism

The UN Security Council impacts on the law of treaties in many different ways — ways that are both foreseen and unforeseen in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This has led to harsh criticism by writers, less so by states. There is an important distinction to be made between obligations that are binding on the parties to a treaty by virtue of their participation therein, and obligations that are binding on states for some reason outside the treaty, for example because they are made so by mandatory Council action. Article 103 of the UN Charter has assumed increasing importance and should not be interpreted narrowly. The Council has shown self-restraint in its approach to treaties, interfering only to the extent necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.

The WPS Agenda and Strategy for the Twenty-First Century

2018 ◽  
pp. 839-849
Author(s):  
Chantal de Jonge Oudraat
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
First Century ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Gender Based Violence ◽  
Community Needs ◽  
Participation Of Women ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
And Gender

UN Security Council Resolution 1325 recognized the critical roles women can and must play in advancing international peace and security. The WPS agenda, however, has focused largely on the protection of women in conflict, in particular from sexual and gender-based violence. In doing so, the substantive participation of women in peace and security remains significantly underexplored. This chapter suggests that the lack of progress on the WPS agenda is due to the perception that it is a women’s agenda, as opposed to one that seeks to advance gender equality and security. Moreover, this chapter reveals the challenges associated with the disparate nature of the WPS and security communities. In response, this chapter suggests that for the WPS agenda to advance, the community needs to emphasize that this is not only a women’s agenda. Specifically, the dialogue needs to be reframed to acknowledge that a focus on women is necessary, but not sufficient.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document