Prospects for UN Renovation and Reform

Author(s):  
Edward C. Luck

This chapter traces and assesses how the four principal inter-governmental organs of the United Nations—the General Assembly, Security Council, ECOSOC, and Trusteeship Council—have changed to meet new challenges and demands. Despite their resistance to formal structural reform, each has proven adept at renovation and adaptation to dynamic conditions. As the more open and rigorous process for selecting a new Secretary-General in 2015–2016 demonstrated, relations among the principal organs remain an area for further renovation in the years ahead. Although slow to reform its structure, the Security Council has proven to be the quickest to adapt its working methods to a changing security environment.

1947 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 410-410

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THEREFORE DETERMINES, in pursuance of Article 93 paragraph 2 of the Charter, and upon the recommendation of the Security Council, the conditions on which Switzerland may become a party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, as follows:Switzerland will become a party to the Statute of the Court on the date of the deposit with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of an instrument, signed on behalf of the Government of Switzerland and ratified as may be required by Swiss constitutional law, containing:(a) Acceptance of the provisions of the Statute of the Court;(b) Acceptance of all the obligations of a Member of the United Nations under Article 94 of the Charter;


1953 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-130

In a letter dated November 10, 1952, the Secretary-General (Lie) requested that the President of the General Assembly (Pearson) include on the agenda the item “Appointment of the Secretary-General of the United Nations”. Mr. Lie stated that it had been his intention to submit his resignation as Secretary-General and he had delayed until the foreign ministers of the five permanent members of the Security Council were present in New York. The General Committee on November 12 recommended the inclusion of this additional item upon the agenda. The subject was not discussed prior to the adjournment of the first part of the seventh session.


1949 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 190-202

1. On 21 November 1947, by its resolution 117 (II), the General Assembly requested the Interim Committee to:“1. Consider the problem of voting in the Security Council, taking into account all proposals which have been or may be submitted by Members of the United Nations to the second session of die General Assembly or to the Interim Committee;“2. Consult with any committee which the Security Council may designate to co-operate with the Interim Committee in the study of the problem;“3. Report, with its conclusions, to the third session of the General Assembly, the report to be transmitted to the Secretary-General not later than 15 July 1948, and by the Secretary-General to the Member States and to the General Assembly.”


Author(s):  
María José Cervell Hortal

The concept of nuclear nonproliferation was coined in a formal way at the beginning of the 1960s, though the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), signed in 1968, would be the text that would consolidate it. After the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, humanity was conscious of the danger of these weapons, and nuclear proliferation turned into one of the main problems of the Cold War period; their control and the implementation of strategies to limit them have become a priority since then. During the Cold War, nuclear weapons and deterrence policy were crucial elements in the peaceful coexistence of the two power blocs, and the initiatives to control them grew, as both countries were conscious of the danger that this accumulation could cause. The NPT created two categories of states: the “officially” nuclear ones, which could maintain their weapons (China, France, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and the United States) and the nonnuclear ones, which were not allowed to acquire or develop them. Two more concepts emerged: vertical proliferation (that of the five official nuclear states) and horizontal proliferation (that of the states that had nuclear weapons but rejected to be a NPT party). Other treaties—multilateral, regional, and bilateral—which also sought to control the nuclear proliferation (see Treaties and Agreements Preventing Nuclear Weapons Proliferation) were subsequently added. The end of the Cold War did not eliminate the danger. In fact, the Security Council considered in 1992 (Document S/23500, 31 January) that the proliferation of nuclear weapons “constitutes a threat for the international peace and security” (p. 4) that permitted it to activate, if necessary, chapter VII of the United Nations (UN) Charter and all the consequences derived from it. With the new millennium, the United Nations Secretary-General described mass destruction arms (nuclear included) as one of the threats to peace and security in the 21st century (see United Nations General Assembly 2005, cited under Security Council, General Assembly, and Secretary-General, para. 78). Nowadays, the nuclear question is still of great relevance. The nuclear problems in the 21st century’s international society are wide and varied and include states that withdrew the NPT (North Korea), states that fail to comply with it (Iran), states that have not yet ratified it (Israel, India, Pakistan), and non-state actors (such as terrorist groups), which are more and more interested in the wide destructive power of nuclear weapons. The adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons of 7 July 2017 was a significant step, but the low number of state accessions shows that nuclear weapons are still a relevant threat.


1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-296

On April 1, 1948, following lengthy discussion of methods of implementing the General Assembly resolution of November 29, 1947, concerning the partition of Palestine, the Security Council approved a resolution calling for the convening of a special session of the Assembly. The resolution requested the Secretary General “in accordance with Article 20 of the United Nations Charter, to convoke a special session of the General Assembly to consider further the question of the future government of Palestine.”


1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 568-573

On November 17, 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the following Resolution:“The General Assembly,Considering Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations,Considering the exchange of views which has taken place in the Security Council at its Two hundred and fourth, Two hundred and fifth and Two hundred and sixth Meetings, relating to the admission of certain States to membership in the United Nations,Considering Article 96 of the Charter,Requests the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on the following question:Is a Member of the United Nations which is called upon, in virtue of Article 4 of the Charter, to pronounce itself by its vote, either in the Security Council or in the General Assembly, on the admission of a State to membership in the United Nations, juridically entitled to make its consent to the admission dependent on conditions not expressly provided by paragraph 1 of the said Article? In particular, can such a Member, while it recognizes the conditions set forth in that provision to be fulfilled by the State concerned, subject its affirmative vote to the additional condition that other States be admitted to membership in the United Nations together with that State?Instructs the Secretary-General to place at the disposal of the Court the records of the above-mentioned meetings of the Security Council.”


Author(s):  
Edward C. Luck

This article discusses the proposals on the negotiating tables at the World Summit that deals with four of the principal organs: the General Assembly, ECOSOC, the Security Council, and the suspended Trusteeship Council. These proposals are situated in a proper historical context. It is also stressed that reform is a process and not an event, and that the United Nations adapts to changing circumstances faster than it adopts structural reform.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Schaefer

Reforming the United Nations Security Council has been on the agenda of the General Assembly for over two decades. However, structural reform of the Council remains elusive. This article explains why after so many years nearly all 193 states within theunremain actively seized on the matter of reform, despite no immediate outcome being in sight. In order to analyze Security Council reform efforts and the various obstacles along the way, this article emphasizes states’ motivations during the reform process. With the help of new institutionalist theory, an argument is formed that highlights how certain states are driven by strategic calculations and self-interest, while others are more normatively motivated. Furthermore, the article highlights that despite only lukewarm support for reform from certain states, not a single state can publicly denounce Council reform, because the reform issue itself has become an ingrained norm.


The United Nations Secretary-General and the United Nations Security Council spend significant amounts of time on their relationship with each other. They rely on each other for such important activities as peacekeeping, international mediation, and the formulation and application of normative standards in defense of international peace and security—in other words, the executive aspects of the UN’s work. The edited book The UN Secretary-General and the Security Council: A Dynamic Relationship aims to fill an important lacuna in the scholarship on the UN system. Although there exists an impressive body of literature on the development and significance of the Secretariat and the Security Council as separate organs, an important gap remains in our understanding of the interactions between them. Bringing together some of the most prominent authorities on the subject, this volume is the first book-length treatment of this topic. It studies the UN from an innovative angle, creating new insights on the (autonomous) policy-making of international organizations and adding to our understanding of the dynamics of intra-organizational relationships. Within the book, the contributors examine how each Secretary-General interacted with the Security Council, touching upon such issues as the role of personality, the formal and informal infrastructure of the relationship, the selection and appointment processes, as well as the Secretary-General’s threefold role as a crisis manager, administrative manager, and manager of ideas.


2000 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 759-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis

Since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, both International Tribunals have grown tremendously in terms of resources. Despite this growth, the International Tribunals have rendered judgments in only fifteen cases and conducted inordinately long trials—a fault for which, perhaps more than any other, they can be justly criticized. The Secretary- General of the United Nations recently appointed an expert group to review the efficiency of the operation of the International Tribunals and make recommendations for improvement. Following the release of the group's report, the General Assembly requested that the Secretary-General obtain comments from the International Tribunals on the experts’ recommendations. The ICTYjudges, for their part, considered these recommendations in a report to the United Nations setting forth a long-term strategy for improving the operation of the Tribunal.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document