scholarly journals The Afghan question in the work of SC & GA of UNO in January, 1980

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Oleksandr L. Kovalkov
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Veto Power ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government

In December, 1979 sub-units of the Soviet Army invaded the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, eliminated Hafizullah Amin from power, established the government of Babrak Karmal and occupied the country. These events caused the condemnation of the international community, that were reflected by the statement on the Afghan question in the agenda of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly in January, 1980. The minute-books of SC of the UNO, as well as the UN General Assembly resolutions are the main sources of research of this problem. The discussion of the Afghan question in the UN Security Council lasted from 5 to 7 January, 1980, involving 42 countries. The USSR Representative to the United Nations O. Troyanovskyi and Foreign Minister of DRA Sh. M. Dost tried to persuade all those present that Soviet troops had been brought to Afghanistan at the invitation of a legitimate Afghan government to repulse allegedly externally-aggressive aggression. Herewith they referred to Article 51 of the UN Charter and Article 4 of the Treaty of Friendship, Neighborhood and Cooperation between the USSR and the DPA. Most of the delegations (primarily the US delegation, Pakistan, the Chinese People’s Republic, Great Britain) rejected the arguments of the Soviet and Afghan sides and condemned Soviet aggression and called for the withdrawal of troops from the territory of Afghanistan immediately. The Soviet Union and the DRA were supported only by a few delegations of Soviet satellites (Poland, the GDR, Hungary, the Mongolian People’s Republic, Laos and Vietnam). But during the vote on the anti-Soviet resolution on January 7, 1980, the USSR expected vetoed it. After that, the consideration of the «Afghan question» was postponed to the General Assembly, where 108 countries condemned the Soviet aggression on January, 14 (18 countries abstained, the same number supported the USSR). The discussion of the «Afghan question» at the United Nations Organization in January, 1980 assured that the Soviet Union had suffered a loud defeat in the international arena, its authority was severely undermined. This was also confirmed by the end of the policy of "discharging" and the subsequent eruption of the Cold War in international relations. In addition, the consideration of the Afghan question at the UNO has shown the lack of a mechanism for influencing an aggressor country that has a veto power in the UN Security Council. The USSR was expected to veto the Security Council resolution, and the decisions of the General Assembly were recommendatory. This is particularly relevant in terms of the current UN crisis in deterring the aggressive actions of the Russian Federation, the DPRK, Syria and others like that.

Amendments to the Charter of the United Nations

1966 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-431
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Social Council ◽  
The United Nations

Amendments to Articles 23, 27, and 61 of the Charter of the United Nations, adopted by the General Assembly on December 17, 1963, came into force on August 31, 1965. The amendment to Article 23 enlarges the membership of the Security Council from eleven to fifteen. The amended Article 27 provides that decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters be made by an affirmative vote of nine members (formerly seven) and on all other matters by an affirmative vote of nine members (formerly seven), including the concurring votes of the five permanent members of the Security Council (China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States). The amendment to Article 61 enlarges the membership of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) from eighteen to 27.

scholarly journals Continuidades e mudanças no discurso brasileiro para obtenção de assento permanente no Conselho de Segurança da ONU dos governos Fernando Henrique Cardoso e Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-547
Author(s):  
Natalia Bandeira Ramos Coelho
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government

Este artigo buscar ampliar a compreensão de um dos principais objetivos da diplomacia brasileira, a candidatura do Brasil ao Conselho de Segurança da ONU (CSNU). O relançamento oficial dessa meta da política externa foi feito pelo Chanceler Celso Amorim, em 1994, durante o governo do Presidente Itamar Franco. Realizou-se uma análise dessa aspiração do Estado brasileiro a partir do estudo comparativo dos discursos proferidos pelos governos dos Presidentes Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) e Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010) nas Sessões Anuais de abertura da Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas (AGNU).  Abstract: This article seeks to broaden understanding of one of the main objectives of Brazilian Foreign Policy: the latter’s campaign for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The current aspiration to rise to a a long-lasting member status in the UN’s most exclusive body was launched in 1994 by the government of former President Itamar Franco, during the tenure of Foreign Affairs Minister Celso Amorim. This study makes a comparative analysis of the speeches made by the administrations of Presidents Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010), delivered at the annual sessions of the UN General Assembly.

scholarly journals THE FAILURE OF UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW: ITS CONTRIBUTION TO CALAMITY AND RUIN OF THE ROHINGYA CASE

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-279
Author(s):  
Renata Christha Auli
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Veto Power ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Political Relationship ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations System ◽  
Nations System ◽  
United Nation

Abstract The tensions between Muslim and Buddhist communities in Rakhine, Myanmar have escalated and became the international spotlight. Massacre in the Rohingya is a serious violation of human rights. In accordance with the functions of the United Nation, this international organization is expected to prevent and eliminate crimes against humanity that occur in the Rohingya. One of the main organs in charge of maintaining international peace and security is the UN Security Council. However, the fact that the United Nations failed to carry out its duties was because Russia has veto power and has blocked the statement which was expressed by UN Security council concerning this situation to punish Myanmar in resolving the Rohingya case, solely due to the political relationship between Russia and Myanmar. The failure of the United Nations is the world's debt to the Rohingya tribe, accordingly to redeem the debt it is needed reform of the UN Security Council.  Keywords: Humanitarian Crimes, Rohingya, Security Council, United Nations, Veto   Abstrak Perseteruan yang terjadi antara umat Muslim dan Buddha di Rakhine, Myanmar, kembali terjadi dan menjadi sorotan dunia internasional. Pembantaian di Rohingya merupakan pelanggaran berat terhadap hak asasi manusia. Perserikatan Bangsa- Bangsa (PBB) merupakan organisasi internasional yang diharapkan dapat mencegah dan menghapus kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan yang terjadi di Rohingya, sesuai dengan fungsi dari Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa. Salah satu organ utama yang bertugas untuk menjaga perdamaian dan keamanan internasional adalah Dewan Keamanan PBB. Namun fakta yang terjadi PBB gagal dalam menjalankan tugasnya karena Rusia terus melakukan veto terhadap Resolusi Dewan Keamanan PBB untuk menghukum Myanmar dalam penyelesaian kasus Rohingya, karena semata- mata hubungan politik antara Rusia dengan Myanmar. Kegagalan PBB merupakan utang dunia terhadap suku Rohingya, sehingga untuk dapat menebus utang tersebut diperlukan reformasi Dewan Keamanan PBB. Kata Kunci: Dewan Keamanan, Kejahatan Kemanusiaan, Perserikatan Bangsa- Bangsa, Rohingya, Veto

4. Resolution of the General Assembly Concerning Conditions on which Switzerland may become a Party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, December 10, 1946.

1947 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 410-410
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government

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;

Non-proliferation Law and the United Nations System: Resolution 1540 and the Limits of the Power of the Security Council

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 489-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
DANIEL H. JOYNER
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Weapons Proliferation ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
International Laws ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations System ◽  
Nations System

This article argues that in passing Resolution 1540, the UN Security Council has confused the proper scope of its enforcement powers under Chapter VII with the proper scope of its long unused, limited, lawmaking powers under Article 26. It has thereby taken to itself by unilateral exercise of its Chapter VII powers a role which, under the Charter system, it is to share with both the General Assembly, in the exercise of its Article 11(1) powers, and the general membership of the United Nations, to whom it is directed under Article 26 to submit proposals for the creation of new international laws in the area of weapons proliferation.

Secretariat

1950 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-474
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Major Powers ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Nationalist Government ◽  
Foreign Ministers

Activities of the Secretary-General: On March 21, 1950, the Secretary-General (Lie), in an address delivered at the triennial dinner of B'nai B'rith in Washington, D.C., called for a twenty-year program of peace within the framework of the United Nations. After referring to the difficulties arising from the non-participation of the Soviet Union in United Nations organs because of the presence of the representative of the Nationalist government of China, Mr. Lie suggested that negotiation between the major powers was possible if the Security Council would hold the “periodic meetings” referred to in Article 28(2) of the Charter, in which the various Members would be represented by either the heads of states or the foreign ministers.

UNAMID withdrawal raises Darfur relapse risk

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
African Union ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Relapse Risk ◽  
Liberation Movement ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Displaced People ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government

Subject Peacekeeping in Darfur Significance The UN Security Council in July authorised a major drawdown and reconfiguration of the United Nations-African Union Hybrid Mission in Darfur (UNAMID). The downsizing was expected. Nevertheless, the mission’s exit does not mark an end to Darfur’s 15-year-old conflict; rather, it increases the potential for a serious deterioration. Impacts The government will persist with efforts to dismantle camps that still play host to 1.8 million displaced people, despite fierce resistance. The weapons collection campaign will deepen tensions between government militias and non-Arab communities, potentially sparking fighting. The army will focus on combatting Sudan Liberation Movement/Abdel Wahid rebels and loyalists of recently arrested militia chief Musa Hilal.

International Court of Justice

1949 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-703
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government ◽  
Fourth Session

On July 27 the Security Council by 9 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions, recommended that the Principality of Liechtenstein be permitted to become a party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice. By this decision the Security Council endorsed the opinion of its Committee of Experts that Liechtenstein was a state under the provisions of Article 93 (2) of the Charter and that the same conditions should apply to it as to Switzerland: acceptance of the provisions of the Statute, acceptance of all the obligations of a Member of the United Nations under Article 94 and agreement to contribute to the expenses of the Court upon assessment by the General Assembly after consultation with the government. The recommendation was to be considered by the General Assembly at its fourth session.

The Security Council Resolution of November 22, 1967—Its Legal Nature and Implications

1969 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Shapira
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Theoretical Inquiry ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The United Nations

More than a year has passed since the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 242 on November 22, 1967, concerning the “grave situation in the Middle East”. On the basis of this resolution, the Secretary-General of the United Nations designated Ambassador Gunnar Jarring as a Special Representative “to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement…” It is not proposed here to analyze all the political and diplomatic aspects of the Resolution or its practical prospects to bring about peace in the Middle East. Nor is it proposed to advance any particular interpretation of its substantive contents or to assess its merits and shortcomings. The sole purpose of this article is to examine the legal nature and implications of the Resolution within the framework of the United Nations Charter.Intellectual curiosity and academic research are not the only motivations for this legal inquiry. Sceptics of the political relevance of such “theoretical” inquiry need only obtain the November 24, 1968 issue of Pravda, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

The Internationalization of Domestic Conflict: The Role of the UN Security Council

1996 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-35
Author(s):  
Niels M. Blokker ◽  
Marieke Kleiboer
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Veto Power ◽  
International Level ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Cold War

In recent years, the UN Security Council has increasingly been involved in domestic conflicts. To explain this development, two lines of arguments have been used most often, both referring to the end of the Cold War. The first line of argument holds that the collapse of the Soviet Union has led to more domestic conflicts that manifest themselves at the international level, and the UN has simply responded to that growing problem. In the second line of argument, the collapse of the Soviet Union has led to an end of the anticipation and use of Soviet veto power in the Security Council, leading to more opportunities for the UN to take a more proactive stance in domestic conflicts. How plausible are these explanations? In this article, the argument is made that both lines of explanation rest partly on faulty premises.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document