scholarly journals The destruction of SFRY and Serbia

Napredak ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 15-20
Author(s):  
Vladislav Jovanović
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
National Minority ◽  
The West ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Will ◽  
Autonomous Province ◽  
Terrorist Acts

The paper recapitulates the process of the destruction of the Yugoslav state (SFRY and FRY). Special attention is given to the key factor in that process, the will of the West, embodied in the USA and the EC (EU), for whom the continued existence of Yugoslavia was no longer of geopolitical interest. The conferences on Yugoslavia, organized in Brussels and The Hague, were supposed to serve to legitimize this goal: the disappearance of Yugoslavia. The author points out that when the West did not manage to achieve its goal with political solutions, it involved NATO, through the aggression in 1999. Previously, Serbia's legitimate opposition to terrorist acts by the KLA on its territory, as an internal issue par excellence, was declared a threat to "peace and security in the world", and the UN Security Council took it as a permanent topic of its sessions. There had been secessionist uprisings and armed conflicts in UN member states before, as there are today, but the Security Council never before dared to violate the article of the UN Charter that states that these questions are the exclusive competence of the member state concerned. An exception was made only in the case of Serbia, although the defense against KLA terrorism was legal and limited to the territory of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, i.e., the Yugoslav state border was never crossed. The false claim of William Walker, the head of the OSCE mission in Kosovo and Metohija, concerning the massacre in Racak, was the cause of the war of aggression against the FRY. By illegally naming the protectorate of Kosovo as the so-called state of the Albanian national minority, the West took this as the final stroke in the dismemberment of Yugoslavia and Serbia, thus ignoring the story of the phoenix rising from its ashes.

COUNTERING “FOREIGN TERRORIST FIGHTERS”: A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-250
Author(s):  
Francesca Capone
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Terrorist Acts

Terrorism constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security. The newest challenge posed by this threat is represented by the phenomenon of “foreign terrorist fighters”. Current estimates place the number of foreigners who have joined the ongoing armed conflicts in the Middle East between 20,000 and 30,000. How many of these foreign fighters also fall within the definition of foreign terrorist fighters (i.e. those travelling abroad with a “terrorist” intent) provided by UN Security Council Resolution 2178 (2014) is very difficult to assess. In primis because the resolution refers to “terrorists”, “terrorist acts”, and “terrorist training” without actually defining “terrorism” and thus leaving to each Member State the task to determine the breadth and the contours of this concept. Secondly because the text lacks legal certainty with regard to many other crucial aspects, e.g., the relationship between counter-terrorism and international humanitarian law, the interpretation of the term “State of residence”, and the risk of abuse of refugee status. These shortcomings not only jeopardize the ability to implement a uniform approach, but they also increase the likelihood of fostering abusive responses. This article argues that Resolution 2178 has not been adopted in a legal vacuum, on the contrary it extensively builds on the anti-terrorism framework established by previous Security Council resolutions and thus it inherits and exacerbates many old and unresolved issues. Ultimately, the present article seeks to determine to what degree the new set of binding obligations placed upon Member States to thwart the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters is effective and it discusses the extent to which it could enhance or hinder counter-terrorism’s compliance with international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international refugee law.

Intervention by Invitation

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory H. Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Government ◽  
Internal Armed Conflicts

This chapter examines the debate concerning a state’s intervention in internal armed conflicts based on invitation, either from the government or from a rebel group fighting against the government. It looks at the issues that arise from intervention by invitation, particularly those relating to the territorial integrity of the state, the status of the actors involved, the nature of the consent, and implications for international law in general and for politics and human rights in particular. The chapter first considers the traditional view of intervention by invitation and the recent challenges to that view. It then discusses the negative equality principle as it applies to intervention in civil wars, as well as the link between intervention by invitation and democratic legitimacy. It also analyses the position of the UN Security Council on intervention by invitation.

scholarly journals The Humanitarian and Social Agenda of the UN Security Council

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-154
Author(s):  
Marina Lebedeva ◽  
◽  
Marina Ustinova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Humanitarian Assistance ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Social Agenda ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
The One ◽  
Soft Security

By the end of XX–the beginning of XXI century the importance of humanitarian and social issues in the world has sharply increased. Humanitarian and social means began to be intensively included in military and economic actions and play a significant independent role. As a result, there was an increase in the importance of “soft security” aspects, and an expansion of this field. This has affected the UN Security Council, which began to pay more attention to humanitarian and social issues, which was demonstrated with the statistical method. The range of humanitarian issues discussed by the Security Council and the list of actors sponsoring resolutions on humanitarian issues has expanded. In the late 1990s–early 2000s the Council begins to consider large amount of humanitarian issues: security issues of individuals in armed conflicts (civilians, children, women, UN and humanitarian personnel); civilian aspects of conflict management and peacebuilding; and separate issues of “soft security” (humanitarian assistance and such “soft threats” to security as HIV/AIDS epidemics, food crises and climate change). In addition, the Council also addresses human rights violations. The promotion of humanitarian issues in the Council on separate occasions was facilitated by high-ranking officials who put a premium on humanitarian issues; various UN bodies and organizations, mainly with humanitarian mandates; some non-permanent members of the Security Council who wanted to leave their mark in the Council’s history; various NGOs. In turn, some countries opposed the adoption of measures that they consider to be within the internal competence of their states. At the same time, the expansion of humanitarian and social problems in the world poses a dilemma for the Security Council: whether to include the entire range of these issues on the agenda, or it is beyond the scope of the Council’s mandate. There is no definite answer here. On the one hand, the world is moving along the path of strengthening humanitarian problems and its ever-greater involvement in security issues. On the other hand, an expanded interpretation of security can impede the work of the Council.

scholarly journals BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA FACES THE EXISTENTIAL THREAT: TIME TO STOP SEPARATISM

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teoman Ertuğrul Tulun
Keyword(s):  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Critical Time ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One ◽  
Republika Srpska ◽  
The Eu

AVİM, for some time, has been drawing attention for developments in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) that threaten the country's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Confirming this foresight, the High Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the report he has recently presented to the UN Secretary General stated the view that BiH is in imminent danger of breaking apart, and there is a very real prospect of a return to conflict. During the UN Security Council UNSC) debate, the representative of the USA expressed concern over Milorad Dodik statements indicating an intention to withdraw Republika Srpska entirely from the Government and described this move as a dangerous path for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the wider region. The Russian Federation (RF) insisted on the closure of the Office of the High Representative and openly declaresd that RF does not recognize the new High Representative. In the UNSC debate, Croatian representative made a "revisionist" statement, while the Serbian representative expressed balanced and careful views. Croatia was supported by the EU Delegation. The declaration of support by the EU for Croatia has a content that could lead to a dangerous path to the more revisionist developments in BiH. It is difficult to say that it is appropriate for the EU to make such a statement supporting the one constituent people at such a critical time. Bosniaks, one of the constituent and the most populous peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina, were left without support and alone in the Security Council. At this critical juncture, Turkey, as a member of the Steering Board of the Peace Implementation Council, seems to be the only country that can show its support to the Bosniaks, reveal the EU's inaction and its partisan position in BiH, and not give an opportunity to those who want to drive the Bosniaks into the corner.

Understanding Evolution of China’s Peacekeeping Policy in the 21st Century

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fahad Nabeel
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Financial Contribution ◽  
Member States ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Usa ◽  
United Nations Peacekeeping ◽  
Financial Contributions

In recent years, China has enhanced its personnel and financial contributions to United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (UNPKOs). According to UN statistics, China is the largest personnel contributor among the five permanent members (P5) of the UN Security Council (UNSC) and 11th largest contributor among UN member states. In terms of financial contribution, China is the 2nd largest contributor, next to the USA, to the UNPKOs in 2018 (Gebrehiwot & Demissie, 2018).

People without Borders for Borders without People: Land, Demography, and Peacemaking under Security Council Resolution 242

2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Dakwar
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
West Bank ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
Green Line ◽  
The West ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
First Time

UN Security Council Resolution 242, drafted to deal with the consequences of the 1967 war, left the outstanding issues of 1948 unresolved. For the first time, new Israeli conflict-resolution proposals that are in principle based on 242 directly involve Palestinian citizens of Israel. This essay explores these proposals, which reflect Israel's preoccupation with maintaining a significant Jewish majority and center on population and territorial exchanges between Israeli settlements in the West Bank and heavily populated Arab areas inside the green line. After tracing the genesis of the proposals, the essay assesses them from the standpoint of international law.

The humanitarian dimension of war — Protection of the individual, whether military or civilian

1992 ◽  
Vol 32 (287) ◽  
pp. 183-186
Author(s):  
Aristidis S. Calogeropoulos-Stratis
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Just War ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Gulf War ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
National Liberation ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Individual

Recently, a number of armed conflicts have broken out in Europe or not far away: armed conflicts between States — the Gulf War, for example, authorized by UN Security Council resolution 678 — or wars of national liberation, such as the armed conflict in Yugoslavia or the revolt in Kurdistan. Whether or not the use of force was legitimate in each of these situations, and even though the classic notion of a “just war” no longer exists, all parties to any armed conflict have a moral, legal and humanitarian obligation to abide by the laws and customs of war in the conduct of hostilities and indeed throughout the entire conflict.

scholarly journals COVID-19 and the Scope of the UN Security Council’s Mandate to Address Non-Traditional Threats to International Peace and Security

2021 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-146
Author(s):  
Erin Pobjie
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Security Framework ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Climate Crisis ◽  
First Time

In Resolution 2532 (2020), the UN Security Council characterised the COVID-19 pandemic as an endangerment to international peace and security and, for the first time, demanded a general ceasefire and humanitarian pause in armed conflicts across the globe. This article analyses the resolution and its broader implications. In particular, it examines the significance of the Council’s characterisation of the COVID-19 pandemic, the binding powers of the Security Council for addressing threats to international peace and security which are not ‘threats to the peace’, and the implications for the Council’s mandate and the collective security framework. This article argues that the concept of ‘international peace and security’ under Article 24(1) of the United Nations (UN) Charter – rather than Article 39 ‘threats to the peace’ – is fundamental to the delimitation of the Security Council’s mandate and powers for addressing non-traditional threats to international peace and security such as pandemics and the climate crisis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document