National Identity and New Zealand’s Actions on the United Nations Security Council: 1993-94 and 2015-16

Political Elite ◽

Material Interests ◽

<p>To win its seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in both 1993-94 and 2015-16, New Zealand campaigned using the same prime pillar; its ability to act independently on the world’s prime authority for maintenance of international peace and security. With the substantial change in New Zealand’s international relationships between the two UNSC tenures, most particularly with the United States of America and China, many commentators have questioned whether New Zealand still acts independently in international affairs. Employing analytic eclecticism, this thesis applied a combined analytical framework to assess the drive behind New Zealand’s actions during both its 1993-94 and 2015-16 UNSC tenures, allowing both traditional international relations theories of neo-realism and neo-liberalism and the constructivist lens of national identity to be combined for greater explanatory power for the state’s actions in the contemporary era of complex international interdependencies. This research determined that most of New Zealand’s actions aligned with pursuit of its interests, as a small state, as ensured through multilateralism under the lens of institutional neo-liberalism. However, a number of actions taken, and strong positions held, by New Zealand on the UNSC in both periods did not align with the state’s pursuit of material interests under traditional international relations theories. By first establishing the popularly internalised national identity characteristics (or content) during each UNSC tenure period, defined as residing in public opinion, this thesis argues that a ‘win-set’ of national identity content relative prioritisation during each period enabled, and arguably drove, New Zealand’s political elite to take actions or hold positions not aligned with those of powerful states on which the small country’s material interests depended. It is argued that New Zealand’s actions on the UNSC in 2015-16 reinforced the social construction of New Zealand’s internationally regarded national identity content as an independent advocate for the global good, which was strongly established during its 1993-94 tenure.</p>

National Identity and New Zealand’s Actions on the United Nations Security Council: 1993-94 and 2015-16

10.26686/wgtn.17067848 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

◽

Kate Breach

Keyword(s):

National Identity ◽

New Zealand ◽

International Relations ◽

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

The United States ◽

Political Elite ◽

Material Interests ◽

In the name of democracy: UNSC reform at the intersection of discourse and governmentality

Discourse & Society ◽

10.1177/0957926520970382 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 095792652097038

Author(s):

Bjarke Zinck Winther ◽

Laura Bang Lindegaard

Keyword(s):

International Relations ◽

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

Democracy Promotion ◽

Reform Process ◽

The United Nations ◽

Reform Debate

Both scholars and practitioners are frustrated by the complexity of United Nations Security Council reform. Most research on the reform process is situated within international relations, and almost no attention is granted to the discursive dimensions of the reform. This article approaches democracy promotion as a governmental rationality within the United Nations, and it traces how this governmentality is co-constituted and negotiated discursively in the reform debate. The analysis focuses on argumentation and topoi in statements from debates about reform during 2015 to 2016 by two groups: The Group of Four and The Uniting for Consensus. The analysis demonstrates how the two groups utilise a topos of majority and a topos of equality, respectively, and how the groups thereby in different ways co-constitute and negotiate the governmental rationality of democracy. Through this, the article unravels the subtle ways in which the rigidity of the reform process is co-constituted through discourse.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231 & Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

International Legal Materials ◽

10.5305/intelegamate.55.1.0098 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 55 (1) ◽

pp. 98-195

Author(s):

Michael D. Rosenthal

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

The United States ◽

Proper Solution ◽

The European Union ◽

Energy Agency ◽

Nuclear Program ◽

Comprehensive Plan ◽

For many years, the United Nations Security Council expressed its concerns about the proliferation risks presented by the Iranian nuclear program, doing so in the context of its primary responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security. With the intent to resolve its concerns, the Security Council adopted Resolution 2231 on July 20, 2015. The Resolution endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that had been concluded on July 14, 2015, by China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States, the European Union, and Iran (the E3/EU + 3). Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA are closely intertwined. Their implementation will result in strict limits on Iran’s ability to produce weapongrade nuclear material. On-site verification and monitoring of these limits by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will provide assurance that Iran is observing them. Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA also provide for a step-by-step removal of sanctions imposed on Iran for its past failure to resolve concerns about its nuclear program. Past concerns about “possible military dimensions” to Iran’s nuclear program, while neither misplaced nor necessarily fully assuaged, were put aside, being outweighed by the prospect that the JCPOA offers, “a comprehensive, long-term and proper solution to the Iranian nuclear issue.”

Trusteeship Council

International Organization ◽

10.1017/s0020818300006135 ◽

1947 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

pp. 342-343

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

United Kingdom ◽

New Zealand ◽

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

The United States ◽

The United Nations ◽

First Session

The last of the main organs of the United Nations to begin functioning, the Trusteeship Council met for its first session at Lake Success on March 26, 1947. Representatives were present from five powers administering trust territories (Australia, Belgium, France, New Zealand and United Kingdom) and four non-administering states (China, Iraq, Mexico, and the United States); the USSR, although automatically a member of the Council by virtue of her permanent membership on the Security Council, did not designate a representative and took no part in the activities of the Council.

Overcoming Opposition at the UNSC: Regional Multilateralism as a Form of Collective Pressure

Journal of Global Security Studies ◽

10.1093/jogss/ogaa013 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 5 (2) ◽

pp. 265-281

Author(s):

Stefano Recchia

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

International Organizations ◽

Iraq War ◽

Democratic Republic ◽

The United States ◽

Republic Of The Congo ◽

Abstract Research suggests that military interveners often seek endorsements from regional international organizations (IOs), in addition to approval from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), to reassure international and domestic audiences. Toward that end, interveners should seek the endorsement of continent-wide regional IOs with the broadest and most diverse membership, which are most likely to be independent. In practice, however, interveners often seek endorsements from subregional IOs with narrow membership and aggregate preferences similar to their own. This should weaken the reassurance/legitimation effect significantly. I argue that such narrower regional endorsements are sought not so much to reassure skeptical audiences, as to pressure reluctant UNSC members to approve the intervention by putting those members’ relations with regional partners at stake. To illustrate this argument and probe its plausibility, I reconstruct France's successful efforts to obtain UNSC approval for its interventions in Côte d'Ivoire (2002–2003) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (2003) at a time when the United States was hesitant to support France because of the two countries’ falling-out over the Iraq War. For evidence I rely on original interviews with senior French and US officials.

Security Council Resolution 678 and Persian Gulf Decision Making: Precarious Legitimacy

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2203110 ◽

1991 ◽

Vol 85 (3) ◽

pp. 516-535 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Burns H. Weston

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

World Order ◽

The United States ◽

Recent Book ◽

Military Force ◽

The United Nations ◽

The Military ◽

Rule Making

In his recent book The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations, Thomas Franck defines “legitimacy” as it applies to the rules applicable among states. “Legitimacy,” he writes, “is a property of a rule or rule-making institution which itself exerts a pull toward compliance on those addressed normatively because those addressed believe that the rule or institution has come into being and operates in accordance with generally accepted principles of right process.In adopting Resolution 678 of November 29, 1990, implicitly authorizing the use of force against Iraq in response to Iraq’s August 2, 1990 invasion and subsequent occupation of Kuwait, the United Nations Security Council made light of fundamental UN Charter precepts and thereby flirted precariously with “generally accepted principles of right process.” It eschewed direct UN responsibility and accountability for the military force that ultimately was deployed, favoring, instead, a delegated, essentially unilateralist determination and orchestration of world policy, coordinated and controlled almost exclusively by the United States. And, in so doing, it encouraged a too-hasty retreat from the preeminently peaceful and humanitarian purposes and principles of the United Nations. As a consequence, it set a dubious precedent, both for the United Nations as it stands today and for the “new world order” that is claimed for tomorrow.

The Women, Peace and Security Agenda: The Unfinished Story of Feminist Revolution versus Compromise in Global Politics

Mezinárodní vztahy ◽

10.32422/mv.1646 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 54 (4) ◽

pp. 47-65

Author(s):

Míla O'Sullivan

Keyword(s):

International Relations ◽

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

Security Council Resolution ◽

Global Politics ◽

Global Order ◽

Security Governance ◽

Peace And Security ◽

The adoption of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security (WPS) in 2000 has prompted the development of an extensive WPS scholarship within the field of feminist International Relations. The dynamic scholarly debate is characterised by certain tensions between two feminist groups – the radical revolutionary one which advocates a redefinition of the global order and is more sceptical of the agenda, and the pragmatist one accentuating the compromise towards the existing peace and security governance. This article explores the two main subjects of the WPS research – the discourse and implementation, as they have been informed by the revolutionary and pragmatist approaches. The article shows that while the academic inquiries into the WPS discourse reveal disappointment with the compromises made regarding the revolutionary vision, this disappointment is also present in the literature on implementation. The latter literature nonetheless acknowledges feminist pragmatism as a way forward given the realities on the ground.

United Nations Security Council: Letter Dated 7 October 2001 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations Addressed to the President of the Security Council

International Legal Materials ◽

10.1017/s0020782900020878 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 40 (5) ◽

pp. 1281-1281 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

United States Of America ◽

The United States ◽

International law and humanitarian intervention

Medjunarodni problemi ◽

10.2298/medjp0701005s ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 59 (1) ◽

pp. 5-48

Author(s):

Sava Savic

Keyword(s):

Moral Responsibility ◽

International Relations ◽

United Nations ◽

International Law ◽

Security Council ◽

Humanitarian Intervention ◽

International Community ◽

The Subject ◽

Taking an action by the international community, individual states or their organizations with the aim of protecting citizens in some country from the tyranny of their own authorities has been defined as a humanitarian intervention. According to international law the use of power as an instrument in international relations is, however, prohibited and therefore, any approach to humanitarian intervention is stretched out between the challenges of moral responsibility and limitations of legislature. The subject of discussion in this article is the legislative aspect of humanitarian intervention by force. The research is focused on law and legitimating of humanitarian intervention by force without the United Nations Security Council approval. .

Pengapusan Hak Veto Dalam Rangka Reformasi Dewan Keamanan Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa

Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law ◽

10.22437/up.v2i2.12114 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 210-234

Author(s):

Dewi Afrilianti ◽

Budi Ardianto ◽

Dony Yusra Pebrianto

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

Research Method ◽

The United States ◽

Veto Power ◽

National Interests ◽

Original Intent ◽

Permanent Member ◽

This study aims to find out what is the reason the veto is considered irrelevant to the Security Council in realizing world security and peace in connection with the plan of veto power in the framework of reform of the United Nations Security Council because the use of veto rights by the five permanent member states of the Security Council, especially the United States has been used with no limits. The research method used is normative type with statutory, conceptual, and case approach. The results of this study show that the security council's veto power in practice has deviated from its original intent. The reform efforts of the United Nations Security Council have many obstacles but the main obstacles that greatly hinder the reform efforts are the arrogant, selfish, and willless nature of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council who are veto holders to continue to maintain their hegemony and national interests. Keywords: United Nations; Right; Veto;