Democratization of the United Nations: What is Expected of India and the European Union?

The United Nations Security Council reflects a setup of the past rather than the reality of the present world order. There has been a clamour for the induction of new countries as permanent members into the council to render it truly universal. But would the expansion of the permanent members naturally lead to the democratization of the most important international organization?India has been one of the claimants for permanent membership. Even though India’s demand is legitimate, it must first seek and secure its place at the global high table and should play a role in helping shape the global order.The European Union tries to lead and influence the international politics by its example and intends to replicate its success at the global level. Just like India, the EU is a votary of ‘multilateralism’ and it stands for the UN, and insists on the need for international laws, agreements, rules and institutions. India is part of EU’s global security strategy and is considered as one among the ‘key’ strategic partners. EU can thus be the perfect and reliable partner for India to achieve its foreign and strategic policy goals. India should join hands with the EU to formulate new global democratic laws and norms, thereby becoming a norm setter on its own right.

Download Full-text

States, firms, and security: How private actors implement sanctions, lessons learned from the Netherlands

European Journal of International Security ◽

10.1017/eis.2020.21 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-20

Author(s):

Francesco Giumelli ◽

Michal Onderco

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

European Union ◽

United Nations ◽

The United States ◽

United Nations Security Council ◽

The European Union ◽

Public Authorities ◽

For Profit ◽

The United Nations ◽

Private Actors

Abstract While the current practice of the United Nations Security Council, the European Union, and the United States leans towards imposing only targeted sanctions in most of the cases, private actors often complain about inability to process financial transactions, ship goods, or deliver services in countries where sanctions targets are located. The impact of sanctions often ends up being widespread and indiscriminate because sanctions are implemented by for-profit actors. This article investigates how for-profit actors relate to the imposition of sanctions, how they reflect them in their decisions, and how they interact with the public authorities. The findings of our research show that for-profit actors, with the possible exception of the largest multinationals, do not engage with public authorities before the imposition of sanctions. The behaviour of for-profit actors in the implementation phase is in line with the assumption of firms and business as profit-maximisers. Weighting the profits from business against the costs of (non-)compliance and make the decisions that in their view maximise their profit. Indeed, de-risking seems to be the most common approach by the companies due to the uncertainties produced by the multiple and overlapping sanctions regimes imposed by the United Nations, the European Union, and the United States.

Download Full-text

Humanitarian aid of the European Union and United Nations: actions, responsibilities, and finances

Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series ◽

10.1515/bog-2015-0025 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 29 (29) ◽

pp. 65-73 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Aleksandra Harat ◽

Michał Chojnacki ◽

Krzysztof Leksowski

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

United Nations ◽

Humanitarian Aid ◽

Humanitarian Assistance ◽

The European Union ◽

The United Nations ◽

Key Events ◽

Financial Issues ◽

The Eu

Abstract The main purpose of the article is to analyze humanitarian aid provided by the European Union and the United Nations. The research includes a review of existing documents, reports, and studies on world humanitarian assistance. The main issues and findings analyzed in this study are the evolution of the humanitarian assistance provided by the European Union and the United Nations and the role of the European Community Humanitarian Aid Office – ECHO and the Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - OCHA – as units responsible for organization and financial issues. On the basis of the history and key events, the finances, and significant projects in the field of humanitarian aid implemented by the EU and the UN are presented. Finally, the authors attempt to assess the effectiveness of assistance.

Download Full-text

English use by the heads of state at the United Nations General Assembly

English Today ◽

10.1017/s0266078419000464 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 1-23

Author(s):

Tomoyuki Kawashima

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

United Nations ◽

Language Choice ◽

General Assembly ◽

The European Union ◽

Language Policies ◽

Official Languages ◽

The United Nations ◽

Heads Of State ◽

The Eu

How do people choose a language when they are proficient in more than one language? This research sheds light on language choice, English use in particular, in diplomacy where an individual speaks primarily for negotiation on behalf of an organization or a community. Nick (2001: 39) argued that ‘language is not a simple tool … but very often the very essence of the diplomatic vocation’. Despite its importance, little has been investigated about language choice in diplomatic meetings (Finsen, 2016). Wodak, Krzyzanowski and Forchtner (2012), one of the few studies, illustrated that 45% of the overall percentage of languages in the European Parliament (EP) meetings was English. To accumulate more data of English use in diplomacy, this research investigated addresses made by the heads of state at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (GA). The EP is the law-making institution of the European Union (EN) (European Union, 2019), and the UN and the EU have contrasting language policies. Under the EU's non-restrictive language policy, national languages of all 23 members are included in the official languages (Finsen, 2016). On the other hand, the UN restricts the number of official languages to six, namely Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish. This makes a difference in the payment for interpretation services. If representatives would like to speak in Portuguese, the EU provides interpretation. However, the UN does not. The speakers need to provide interpretation into one of the six official languages on their own. These contrasting language policies between the EU and the UN can influence language choice at the UN meetings. Moreover, the UN has a larger number of member states than the EU, and many of them belong to other language or regional organizations. Therefore, this study focuses on the prevalence of English use by the heads of state at the UN GA meetings according to five language and two regional groups.

Download Full-text

In quest of a single European Union voice in the United Nations General Assembly: The politics of Resolution 65/276

Cooperation and Conflict ◽

10.1177/0010836716684879 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 52 (4) ◽

pp. 451-468 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Spyros Blavoukos ◽

Dimitris Bourantonis ◽

Ioannis Galariotis

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

United Nations ◽

Relevant Literature ◽

Significant Degree ◽

General Assembly ◽

The European Union ◽

United Nations General ◽

United Nations General Assembly ◽

The United Nations ◽

The Eu

In May 2011, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) passed Resolution 65/276 that enhances the European Union (EU) institutional mode of representation in the UNGA and other multilateral fora operating under its auspices. This followed an earlier, failed attempt that caused much embarrassment and political turmoil in the EU. The article examines the politics of this resolution, tracing its background logic, its origins and the political interactions in the UN that eventually led to its almost consensual embracement. It accounts for the failure in the first stage of the negotiations and how the EU responded to it, adjusting its bargaining strategy accordingly. This case study contributes to the better understanding of the links between intra-EU coherence and EU effectiveness as an international actor. We posit that there is one additional dimension of EU coherence not fully captured in the relevant literature. We distinguish between genuine coherence and generated coherence. The former entails homogeneity, or at least a significant degree of a priori convergence among EU member-states. The latter refers to EU positions that have emerged after hard and protracted intra-EU negotiations. The two types differ in the degree of flexibility bestowed on the EU in international negotiations.

Download Full-text

The United Nations and the European Union

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1091 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Carla Monteleone

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

United Nations ◽

General Assembly ◽

The European Union ◽

Member States ◽

Eu Member States ◽

Wide Range ◽

The United Nations ◽

Organizational Cooperation ◽

The Eu

The European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN) are expressions of a rules-based global order. The EU has enshrined support to the UN in its security strategies, and its priorities indicate an engagement in a wide range of UN programs and activities to maintain the rules-based order and adapt it to face internal and external challenges. The EU and its member states are the largest contributors to the UN budget. Following the adoption of the Lisbon treaty, the EU has increased its representation at the UN, gaining enhanced observer status in the General Assembly. However, because of the intergovernmental nature of the forum, only its member states have the right to vote. This has led scholars to investigate the actorness of the EU at the UN through the analysis of the voting cohesion of EU member states in the General Assembly. Less attention has been paid to the behavior of EU member states in the Security Council. Existing scholarship has tended to analyze how the EU acts within the UN more than inter-organizational cooperation. However, the contribution of the EU and its member states to UN activities in the area of peace and security maintenance is particularly relevant and is a reminder that inter-organizational cooperation deserve greater attention than the one it has received so far.

Download Full-text

Introduction

Ethics & International Affairs ◽

10.1017/s0892679419000340 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 33 (3) ◽

pp. 275-277

Author(s):

Joy Gordon

Keyword(s):

Foreign Policy ◽

United Nations ◽

The United States ◽

United Nations Security Council ◽

Political Regime ◽

The European Union ◽

Weapons Proliferation ◽

Policy Goals ◽

Political Interests ◽

The United Nations

It is hard to imagine a threat to international security or a tension within U.S. foreign policy that does not involve the imposition of economic sanctions. The United Nations Security Council has fourteen sanctions regimes currently in place, and all member states of the United Nations are obligated to participate in their enforcement. The United States has some thirty sanctions programs, which target a range of countries, companies, organizations, and individuals, and many of these are autonomous sanctions that are independent of the measures required by the United Nations. Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and others also have autonomous sanctions regimes, spanning a broad range of contexts and purpose. Most well-known are those concerning weapons proliferation, terrorism, and human rights violations; but sanctions are also imposed in such contexts as money laundering, corruption, and drug trafficking. States may also impose sanctions as a means to achieve foreign policy goals: to pressure a foreign state to bend to the sanctioner's will, to punish those who represent a threat to the sanctioner's economic or political interests, or to seek the end of a political regime toward which the sanctioner is hostile, to give but a few examples.

Download Full-text

Instrumenty polityki równości płci w kontekście sytuacji w Polsce

10.31338/1641-2478pe.2.16.5 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 88-109

Author(s):

Wiktoria Domagała

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

United Nations ◽

Gender Equality ◽

Gender Inequality ◽

Equal Opportunities ◽

The European Union ◽

The United Nations

The article undertakes the issue of gender equality policies in the context of its indicators. The main purpose of the paper is to identify the areas of gender inequality, its scale and determinants. Firstly, the article presents the legislation of gender equality policies – its main objectives. Next, the paper discusses indicators that were implemented by organisations such as the Organisation of the United Nations and the European Union. These selected indicators are presented, taking into account the situation in Poland. In conclusion, the paper highlights the main obstacles to the pursuit of equal opportunities for women and men in Poland.

Download Full-text