The role of the UN and the UN Security Council in resolving international conflicts. The role of the UN in solving regional problems What role does the UN play in resolving conflicts
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL “INNOVATIVE SCIENCE” No. 5/2016 ISSN 2410-6070
408,000 rub. (l.2). This decision was not implemented as prescribed. The People's Commissariat of Finance of the USSR allocated 300,000 rubles. through the reserve fund of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR. The remaining funds (108,000 rubles) were allocated at the expense of the BSSR, since these measures led “to strengthening the fixed capital of Belseltrest and the source for them can only be funds from the republic” (l. 27).
Further developments showed that the forecast hay production indicators were not met. There was a constant shortage of it in the troops. List of used literature:
1. On the organization of the state meadow fund to provide the Red Army with high-quality hay, both in peacetime and in wartime // State Archives Russian Federation(GARF). - Fund R-8418. Op.
© Krivchikov V.M., 2016
D.F. Savranskaya
History teacher, Municipal Budgetary Educational Institution “School No. 35”, Prokopyevsk, Russian Federation
UN ACTIVITY IN THE SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS
In the light latest events in the world, such as the threat of the spread of terrorism represented by the most terrible radical organization of our time, ISIS, this work could not be more relevant. Due to a number of problems experienced world community in the 21st century, it is necessary to take a set of measures to strengthen collective security and resolve international conflicts. Currently, the role and importance of the UN, as the main international organization for conflict resolution, has significantly decreased.
The United Nations is a unique international organization. It was founded after the Second World War by representatives of 51 countries who were supporters of the policy of maintaining peace and security throughout the world.
According to Article 1 of the UN Charter, the purposes of the UN are:
1. Maintain international peace and security
2. Develop friendly relations between nations based on respect for the principle of equality and self-determination of peoples.
3. Implement international cooperation in resolution international problems economic, social, cultural and humanitarian nature.
4. Be a center for coordinating the actions of nations in achieving these common goals.
The Security Council plays a leading role in determining whether a threat to peace or an act of aggression exists. It encourages the parties to a dispute to settle it peacefully, and recommends methods of settlement or terms of settlement.
The entire history of international conflicts resolved by the UN can be divided into two periods. From its founding until the 1990s, the UN primarily resolved interstate conflicts. There is no doubt that the nature of international conflicts has changed.
During its existence, the UN has accumulated a lot of experience in resolving armed conflicts. The vast majority of clashes currently are internal. Conflicts of our time also have one distinctive feature. During the period cold war", sanctions were applied by the UN only twice - against Southern Rhodesia in 1966 and South Africa in 1977.
But in the 1990s alone, sanctions were imposed by the Security Council seven times more often than in the previous 45 years. They began to resort to sanctions especially often at the end of the 20th century. beginning of XXI c., after the end of the Cold War. And you can already think about the effectiveness of this organization.
Now let’s turn our attention to the problems in the world that occurred at the beginning of the 21st century. Consider the US-Iraq conflict (2001-2003), which, in my opinion, influenced the intensification of the civil war and the spread of ISIS into Syria.
According to UN Security Council Resolution No. 687, after the end of the Gulf War and Iraq, a special commission arrived to oversee the elimination of weapons mass destruction and termination of the program for the development of chemical, nuclear and bacteriological weapons. The commission successfully performed its functions until 1998, after which it was forced to leave Iraq due to the Iraqi side’s refusal to further cooperate.
The first speculations about a possible American military operation against Iraq appeared in the media mass media immediately after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Since the middle of the year, the United States began demanding the return of international inspectors to Iraq.
The situation around the return of inspectors to Iraq has acquired the features of the US-Iraq crisis. Under pressure from the United States and after the adoption of UN Security Council resolution 1441. in November 2002, Saddam Hussein finally agreed to the return of international inspectors to the country. The UNMOVIC Commission arrived in Iraq and searched for weapons of mass destruction until the start of the Iraq War, but did not find any traces of a resumption of their production. The goal of this war was to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein. And the United States used all possible methods in this case and, even despite the UN ban, still carried out an operation against Iraq, not paying attention to the opinions of the international community and the demands of the General Assembly.
The US war in Iraq ended in 2011. The last US military convoy crossed the border into Kuwait. American soldiers and officers call their departure a historical moment. They were jubilant. Meanwhile, the head of the Iraqi government, Nouri al-Maliki, called the withdrawal of troops evidence of success. According to him, the set goals have been achieved, democracy in the country has strengthened. In the fall of 2011, an armed conflict began in Syria. Large-scale anti-government protests against President Bashar al-Assad have escalated into civil war. During the conflict, Islamists opposed to Assad, united into one group called the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (which later shortened to the Islamic State or ISIS), began to make impressive progress in Iraq and then in Syria, taking control of large areas of this country.
On September 30, 2015, Russia, at the request of President Bashar al-Assad, began conducting targeted airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Syria. The situation in Syria remains difficult, despite the ongoing attempts of the UN and leaders of leading states to stop the bloodshed.
The draft resolution proposed by Russia demanding respect for the sovereignty of Syria was rejected by six members of the UN Security Council, three of which - the United States, Britain and France - have the right of veto, as well as Spain, New Zealand and Ukraine. 2258, 2257, 2254, 2235, 2216, 2209, 2204, 2201 are resolutions of 2015. In 2016, 2 resolutions No. 2266 and 2268 were adopted on Syria, and in each the UN calls for a ceasefire to establish order within the state. But terrorist groups and the world community are in no hurry to comply with these demands.
In the modern world large number international conflicts cannot be resolved using classical methods. Each conflict is unique and requires an equally unique approach to resolution. Thus, the UN must reconsider its attitude towards collective international security. I would like to believe that the situation will change in the near future.
List of used literature: 1. Yu.N. Maleev. UN Security Council and issues of international governance.//International
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL “INNOVATIVE SCIENCE” No. 5/2016 ISSN 2410-6070_
law.2006. - No. 1(25). - P. 24-47.
2. Full text UN Charter in Russian http://www.un.org/ru/charter-united-nations/index.html
3. Official website of the UN un. org/ru
4. Echo of Moscow: News // echo msk.ru
5. RIA Novosti, Olga Denisova. Russian resolution on Syria http://ria.ru/syria/20160220/1377549941.html
© Savranskaya D.F., 2016
480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Dissertation - 480 RUR, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week and holidays
Gegraeva Leilya Khamzatovna. The role of the UN in resolving international conflicts: 23.00.04 Gegraeva, Leilya Khamzatovna The role of the UN in resolving international conflicts (On the example of the Arab-Israeli, Rwandan and Iraqi conflicts): Dis. ...cand. watered Sciences: 23.00.04 Moscow, 2005 166 p. RSL OD, 61:05-23/220
Introduction
Chapter 1. Participation of the UN in the development of the world political process 13
1. The role of the UN in ensuring a system of collective security 13
2. Modern conflicts and ways to resolve them in accordance with UN methods 28
Chapter 2. The UN and the resolution of international crises and conflicts in the modern world 44
1. Arab-Israeli conflict 44
2. Humanitarian tragedy in Rwanda 57
3. Iraq crisis 69
Chapter 3. Problems and ways of reforming the UN structure in the context of growing threats of international terrorism 78
1. New challenges and threats at the beginning of the 21st century. The UN Security Council and its role in the fight against international terrorism 78
2. Reforming the Security Council in accordance with new challenges and threats 95
3. The main factors of the ineffectiveness of the UN mechanism in resolving international crises and prospects for the development of the UN 108
Conclusion 118
List of sources and literature 127
Documentary applications 141
Introduction to the work
The object of the dissertation research is the place and role of the United Nations in the system of modern international political institutions and in the global political process.
The subject of the dissertation research is the activities of the UN as a guarantor international peace and security, as well as the system of interaction between states as subjects international law carrying out cooperation within the UN. The author also examines the UN mechanisms used to resolve conflict situations and the combination of factors influencing the effectiveness of the UN.
Relevance of the topic. More people died in armed conflicts in the 20th century than in all previous human history. It became the most destructive and bloody. Conflicts have become one of the leading factors of instability on earth. Modern conflicts pose a threat not only to the parties to the conflict, but also to the entire world community. And, despite the end of the Cold War, the world still faces the threat of nuclear war from major nuclear powers. At the same time, in today's dynamic, rapidly developing world, interstate conflicts have given way to civil wars. The collapse of the bipolar world led to the creation of new states, new types of threats to international peace and security emerged, which predetermined the need to intensify the activities of the universal international organization - the UN. The political processes taking place at this stage of social development reveal the need to study conflicts and analyze their causes and consequences.
The choice as the topic of the dissertation is the analysis of the role of the UN in resolving international crises and conflicts in modern stage due to the fact that the UN is entrusted with the main responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. It is also important to analyze the activities of the UN in resolving international conflicts and identifying factors that influence negative influence on the effectiveness of UN actions. It should be noted that the UN was created to unite all states in order to counter threats to international peace and stability. Consequently, international peace and security largely depend on the results of the UN, or, in other words, on the consolidation of the efforts of the world community in the fight against new threats to international peace and stability.
Goals and objectives. The purpose of the study is to analyze the multidimensional role of the UN in resolving international conflicts at the present stage, as well as to determine its contribution to the process of resolving international crises and conflicts. In accordance with this goal, the study set the following objectives:
1. Trace the process of the emergence of the need for a universal organization, which is the guarantor of international peace and stability, and analyze the evolution of its formation.
2. Study and summarize the positions of domestic and foreign scientists on the problem under consideration.
3. Explore the methods and tools used by the UN to resolve conflict situations.
4. Analyze the activities of the UN in resolving international conflicts using the example of the Arab-Israeli, Rwandan, and Iraqi conflicts.
5. Based on the conflict situations considered in the Security Council, assess the activities of the UN Security Council and the relationships between the permanent members of this Council.
6. Determine the role of the UN in maintaining the balance of power in the international political arena.
7. Justify the need to reform the UN, and in particular the UN Security Council, in accordance with the changing international situation.
8. Analyze the main factors that reduce the effectiveness of the UN.
Methodological basis. The dissertation is devoted to the role of the UN in resolving international conflicts at the present stage. The subject of the dissertation research involves the use of certain scientific methods that allow for an objective and comprehensive analysis. To achieve these goals and solve the assigned problems, the following methods were used:
1. Method political analysis- when tracing the process of formation, formation and development of the UN as a guarantor of international peace and security.
2. System analysis- when determining the role of the UN in the system international relations, during which the subject of research is considered as a complex process.
3. Normative method - analysis of the provisions of international legal and regulatory documents, as well as UN Security Council resolutions, documents and recommendations of the UN General Assembly.
In the dissertation, the author, in addition to using the above-mentioned methods of analysis, also used the method of event analysis (inventory analysis). Taken together, this makes it possible to assess ongoing international conflicts by analyzing their dynamics, identify general trends in their development and determine the role of the UN in their resolution.
The degree of development of the topic. In the process of working on the dissertation, numerous works of Russian and foreign political scientists and historians were used. It should be noted that there is an almost complete absence of comprehensive research on this topic. This topic is partially touched upon in the works of Russian and foreign scientists: N.V. Aleksandrova “Ways and methods of resolving ethnopolitical conflicts in the modern world”, M.V. Andreev “Modern international legal aspects of reforming the UN Security Council”, S.V. Shatunovsky-Burno “Increasing the effectiveness of the UN, international legal aspects”, D.V. Polikanov “Conflicts in Africa and the activities of international organizations to resolve them”, Getacheu Gigi Delixsa “Ethnopolitical conflicts in Africa”, Khairy Naji Abdel Fatah Al-Oridi “ Middle East Peace Process: The Palestinian Track."
It should be noted that the majority of foreign and Russian scientists believe that the UN should play the leading role in preventing and resolving conflicts. An attempt to bypass or formally “hide behind” the UN not only does not contribute to the process of conflict management, but also leads to its further escalation. The political processes taking place in the modern world have set scientists the task of finding the causes of the changes taking place, identifying general trends, and determining the importance of the UN in maintaining the balance of power in the political arena.
Sources and literature. During the research, the author relied on documentary sources, Russian and foreign works and publications.
The main sources were UN documents, and one of the main ones is the UN Charter, which contains the principles of international relations, namely: national self-determination, sovereign equality of states, the prohibition of the use of force in international relations, the affirmation of fundamental human rights, etc. Also, UN Security Council resolutions and official reports of the Secretary General on their implementation, documents of the General Assembly, statements by the Chairman of the UN Security Council, as well as agreements between various parties on a ceasefire, cooperation, etc. were studied and analyzed.
Another important source was materials from relevant Internet sites: www.un.org, www.un.org/russian, www.un.org/russian/document/centre.
In the course of the work, the dissertation author relied on the works of Russian scientists, among whom it is necessary to highlight the following authors: L.N. Abaev, E.P. Bazhanov, E.G. Baranovsky, A.V. Bursov, S. Gorov, L.E. Grishaeva , K.M.Dolgov, V.E.Dontsov, S.A.Egorov, A.G.Zadokhin, T.A.Zakaurtseva, G.G.Kadymov, A.Kapto, N.A.Kosolapov, K.N .Kulmatov, M.M.Lebedeva, V.F.Li, A.V.Mitrofanova, G.S.Nikitina, E.M.Primakov, G.A.Rudov, S.V.Tyushkevich, E.V.Frolova , O.O. Khokhlysheva, P.A. Tsygankov, S.A. Shlyakov, etc.
Among the works devoted to the problem of Middle East settlement, noteworthy is the book by E.M. Primakov “The World after September 11”, where the author examines possible approaches to resolving international conflicts, in particular the Middle East, which creates fertile ground for international terrorism, substantiates the importance of strengthening the role of the UN in connection with the events of September 11, 2001, which changed public opinion on international issues security and stability.
MM. Lebedeva in her monograph “Political Resolution of Conflicts” calls modern conflicts one of the leading factors of instability on the globe. Being difficult to resolve, they tend to grow and involve more and more participants, which creates a serious threat not only for the participants, but also for the entire world community. This threat increases significantly if we take into account that major environmental disasters are possible even in the case of small local conflicts. The 1991 Gulf War clearly demonstrated the danger to the planet's ecology that burning oil wells can pose. It took the efforts of many countries to extinguish fires at wells, as well as to clean the surface of the earth from oil pollution.
S.A. Tyushkevich in the book “The New Redivision of the World” analyzes the problems of strategic and military security in the context of the globalization process at the beginning of the 21st century, touching on the aggressive wars in Yugoslavia and Iraq and the behavior of the United States. He believes that military force as a political instrument retains its importance, and the world continues to live according to laws when the predominant right to influence the state of international relations is assigned to those who have more power. military force. This was confirmed by the US aggression against Iraq in March-April 2003.
Among the works devoted to the classification of conflicts and methods of their resolution, the work of E.G. Baranovsky “Insurance of Peace” should be highlighted, where the author assesses the role of the UN. E.G. Baranovsky evaluates the role of this international organization in creating and improving mechanisms for protecting international peace and collective security, analyzes the concept of peacekeeping and the features of PKOs (peacekeeping operations) of the first, second and third generations, as well as problems associated with the implementation of PKOs in practice and ways their decisions.
O.O. Khokhlyshev in the book “International legal problems of UN force peacekeeping and possible options their solutions”, examines the international legal problems of UN force peacekeeping and the mechanism of international legal regulation of peacekeeping operations. According to the author, legal regulation is the highest priority way to influence international relations. At the same time, the main condition for ensuring international legal order is the need to comply with international legal norms in accordance with national legislation and international standards.
In the monograph by V.N. Fedorov “The UN is an instrument for maintaining international peace and security” provides a detailed analysis of the conceptual and practical aspects of the UN’s activities, describes specific historical precedents in its activities, and suggests possible options for improving peacekeeping instruments.
A deep analysis is inherent in the works of A.I. Nikitin, which examine in detail the issues of distribution of powers in the field of peacekeeping between the UN Security Council, the General Assembly and the UN Secretariat. In his book Peacekeeping Operations: Concepts and Practice, the author special attention focuses on issues related to the use of armed forces against states that threaten international peace and security, the practical activities of the UN to intervene in conflicts, and the legal basis for peacekeeping operations using armed forces.
The dissertation author also turned to the works of such foreign authors as E. J. Carvalho, B. Fassbinder, P. Calvocoressi, R. Dahrendorf, L. Koser, M. Amstutz, B. Boutros - Ghali, Khairy Naji Fatah al-Oridi, G. .Kissinger, S. Huntington, Nazim Mezhid ad-Deirawi, etc.
Of particular interest is the book by Abulmagda A.K., Arispe L., Ashrawi X. et al. “Overcoming Barriers,” which characterizes the last decade of the 20th century, marked by the misfortunes of people affected by conflicts, and their participants justified their actions, citing ethnic, religious, tribal, cultural, gender or other differences. But, according to the authors, the main cause of conflicts is a person, be it a leader or a member of a group. Dialogue between civilizations is an attempt to find new opportunity look at other peoples, their cultures and civilizations from a global, local and even individual point of view, and also understand the role and significance of the UN in this dialogue.
It should also be noted that B. Boutros-Ghali’s book “An Agenda for Peace”, where the author tried to determine the most effective measures in relation to the process of maintaining peace on the planet. They were offered the following main peacekeeping tools: preventive diplomacy, peacekeeping, peacekeeping, disarmament, post-conflict world order. At the same time, special attention is paid to preventive diplomacy, which is defined by the author as the most effective tool, representing actions aimed at preventing the emergence of a dispute between conflicting parties, preventing existing disputes from escalating into conflicts and limiting the spread of the latter if they have already occurred.
To understand the general context of international relations that determined the tasks of the UN, the books of American scientists Z. Brzezinski and S. Huntington were useful.
Book 3. Brzezinski “The Great Chessboard”, dedicated to the US strategy, the goals and objectives of American policy, identifies as the final goal the creation of a truly cooperative world community in accordance with long-term trends and fundamental interests of humanity. At the same time, it emphasizes the importance of ensuring that there is no rival in the political arena that is capable of dominating Eurasia and, therefore, challenging America.
S. Huntington, in his book “The Clash of Civilizations,” identifies the conflict between groups of different civilizations as the central and most dangerous aspect of the emerging global politics. Defining Western civilization as a civilization that has a fairly strong influence on global development, he at the same time does not exclude the viability of other civilizations. In the modern era, he sees clashes of civilizations as the greatest threat to world peace, and only an international order based on their coexistence is the most reliable measure of preventing a new world war.
I. G. Martins’ book “A View of the Modern World” is also of great interest. The author is of the opinion that exactly in his leading role- the role of the guardian of peace - the UN has undergone a complete failure, and the original idea of unanimity of the 5 great powers, based on the use of the veto, has turned into a tool for international blackmail and for limiting the role of the UN.
Among the works of foreign and Russian scientists studied by the author of the dissertation on the Arab-Israeli conflict, one cannot help but highlight the dissertation work of Khairy Naji Abdel Fattah al-Oridi “The Middle East Peace Process: The Palestinian Direction”, in which the author tried to find the real cause of this conflict and propose possible ways to resolve it.
The scientific novelty of the dissertation lies in the fact that it comprehensively examines the role of the UN in resolving international conflicts. Taking into account new political trends that have emerged both in global development and in peacekeeping activities, the activities of the UN in this direction are characterized and the main factors of the ineffectiveness of the UN mechanism in resolving international crises and conflicts are identified. Possible directions for reforming the UN Security Council are considered.
Practical significance. The results of the dissertation can be used in various departments of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in teaching, in preparing and delivering training courses on the role of the UN in the development of international relations and the formation of a collective security system. The work may be useful for researchers, teachers and students, political scientists and specialists in international relations. The results of the study can be used in the further development of the UN peacekeeping strategy.
Structure of the dissertation. The work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a list of sources and literature, and applications.
Modern conflicts and ways to resolve them in accordance with UN methods
The 20th century turned out to be the most destructive and bloody. About 140-150 million people have died in wars and armed conflicts over the course of a century. Some researchers are of the opinion that threshold of XXI century and the third millennium, two trends clearly emerged in matters of war and peace, expressing both optimism and anxiety. On the one hand, the positive changes of the 90s in relations between states give rise to the expectation of a “peaceful era” and expand the opportunity to overcome such an evil as war. On the other hand, the great powers, instead of seizing the opportunity and moving towards decisive demilitarization, maintain traditional approaches to military development characteristic of the Cold War.10
According to some political scientists, modern conflicts have become one of the leading factors of instability on the globe. Being poorly managed, they tend to involve more and more participants, which creates a serious threat not only to their participants, but also to everyone living on earth. This threat increases significantly if we take into account that major environmental disasters are possible even in the case of small local conflicts. The Gulf War in 1991 in connection with Iraq's occupation of Kuwait clearly demonstrated the danger to the planet's ecology that burning oil wells can pose.
It took the efforts of many countries to extinguish fires at wells, as well as to clean the surface of the earth from oil pollution.”
On the other hand, aggressiveness on the part of the United States and other Western countries has increased. The wars that were started by the aggressors led to the death of many thousands of soldiers and civilians and damaged the economies of a number of countries, such as the war in Yugoslavia. According to Yugoslav sources, the damage from the fighting amounts to 130 billion. dollars. According to estimates of authoritative Western financial and political institutions, NATO spent 8-10 billion on military needs. dollars, of which 75% was allocated by the United States.
But neither America nor other countries have realized that, ultimately, in these wars and conflicts there are no winners, only losers. The trend of global political processes in the modern world indicates an exacerbation of ethnic conflicts. Wars and armed conflicts lead to the collapse of states, the formation of new ones, and changes in political regimes. Processes of change are natural if they are carried out in a civilized way, but changes that occur as a result of death and destruction, bloody wars and acts of violence cannot be called civilized. One of the most bright examples The Rwandan conflict, in which the number of victims reached 1 million people, more than 2 million people became refugees, is of this kind, characterizing uncivilized ways of struggling for political power. Thus, the processes taking place in the modern world reflect the need to improve methods of preventing and resolving conflicts, which is associated with identifying their essence, causes, and consequences. Analysis of the nature of conflicts and wars has been undertaken both by thinkers of past centuries and by modern scientists.
A. Smith believes that the source of conflict in society is the division of society into classes and rivalry between classes.13
According to Marx, conflict is a temporary state of society, and therefore it is possible to achieve such a level in the development of society when conflicts disappear.
But there is another, opposite point of view, whose supporters are of the opinion that society cannot exist without conflicts, that conflict is an integral part of existence. In accordance with this point of view, conflict is not a pathology, but is a norm of relations between people, a necessary element of social life, giving vent to social tension, giving rise to social changes in society. The followers of this theory are G. Simmel, L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf
According to R. Dahrendorf, society is in a state of constant conflict. The level of social tension depends on their desire and ability to change their position in society. Relations of domination and subordination, unequal distribution of power are the basis of conflict.14 And since inequality in the distribution of power cannot be eliminated from the life of society, social society cannot reach a level of development at which conflicts will disappear and cease to be an integral part of existence.
G. Simmel is of the opinion that conflict consists in the emergence of certain disagreements and at the same time is a socializing force that unites warring parties and contributes to the stabilization of society, despite the fact that it is one of the forms of disagreement.
In accordance with the theory of L. Coser, conflicts are generated by the very essence of man and society and have a functionally positive impact on the historical process. Thus, he viewed conflict as a process that promotes the reintegration of society through social change.15
But not all researchers of this issue consider conflict as a phenomenon expressed in the existence of social tension in society, confrontation between different classes, which can lead to violence, or as a struggle for values and claims to a certain status, power, resources, a struggle in which the goal opponents is to neutralize or destroy the opponent.
M. Amstutz sees in most conflicts positive meaning, since they provide positive influence on human life, since a conflict situation gives society dynamism. He believes that without tension and debate it would be uncreative and unproductive.1 But does the end justify the means? Isn't the price for developing society's creative potential too high? Due to the fact that modern conflicts occur with the use of armed forces and are replete with elements of violence, and violent conflict resolution is generally the most commonly used method of resolution conflict situation- all this causes worsening chaos and instability and leads to severe economic and political crises.
Humanitarian tragedy in Rwanda
In the early 90s, the UN was faced with a wave of conflicts of a new generation, intrastate in nature with ethnic and religious roots. As an example, we can consider the tragedy in Rwanda and the actions of the UN in resolving this conflict.
More than a year has passed since then tragic events in Rwanda. The Rwandan civil war can be described as a "war of total annihilation" between the ethnic Hutu majority and the Tutsi minority. Speaking about the Rwandan conflict, it should be noted that it occurred on ethnic grounds. The two tribes Tutsi and Hutu occupied different social levels, the Tutsis were higher, and the Hutus had a subordinate position, despite the fact that they represented the ethnic majority. There have been ethnic clashes between these tribes throughout history. Subsequently, these clashes escalated into a brutal massacre, which took on terrifying proportions. The most severe conflict lasted more than 3 months. During this period, about 1 million died. Human.
The extremist trend first appeared in 1962, when Rwanda gained independence. The first president of Rwanda was G. Kayibanda, from the Hutu tribe. Political power was concentrated in the hands of the president and the Republican Democratic Movement party. It was with the advent of this party that extremism arose in Rwanda, as it advocated the liberation of the Hutu people through the physical elimination and expulsion of Tutsis from the country. In response to the extremist ideology of the ruling party, the Tutsi people created a military-patriotic movement - the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). Subsequently, units of this movement in 1990. entered Rwanda to protect the Tutsi people from Hutu hegemony. The problem was that the defense was carried out using armed struggle. Despite the fact that on August 4, 1993 The Arusha Agreement was signed, which provided for an end to the civil war, but there was no improvement in the situation in the country. The escalation of the conflict was led to by the events that occurred on April 6, 1994, namely the fact that on that day a plane carrying President J. Habyarimana was shot down in Kigali. Whether the death of J. Habyarimana was the reason or the cause is unknown, but there is no doubt that it was the death of the president that became the impetus that led to the mass extermination of civilians in Rwanda, which lasted 3 months. Events in Rwanda indicate that systematic, widespread and flagrant violations of international law are being committed in Rwanda. What was the main reason for the events that happened? Undoubtedly, the main reason is the ethnic factor, which is the most difficult problem on the African continent. Also, as a factor contributing to armed action, one can highlight the contradictions that arise when establishing and regulating relations at various levels of government, since the conflict in Rwanda is expressed in the struggle of various ethnic groups for dominance in government bodies and control of the country's resources. When studying the causes of the Rwandan conflict, the socio-economic factor should be noted. The socio-economic factor lies in the low level of economic development of African countries. (At that time, the human development index in 1993 was 0.379. The total GDP of the countries of tropical Africa did not exceed 250 billion dollars in 1993, and its growth was 1.5% in 1980-1993. GNP per capita in 1993 was 555 dollars, and the growth rate of this indicator in the period from 1980-1993 turned out to be negative - 0.6%).43 The intertwining of the socio-economic factor with the ethnic one creates the basis for a conflict that is difficult to resolve and resolve. From the above, we can conclude that with a low level of socio-economic development, access to power is the only way to enrich a certain group and uncontrolled disposal of national wealth. Some Russian political scientists also adhere to a similar point of view, believing that the development of ordinary interethnic tension into a call for political independence occurs only when political independence becomes economically beneficial.44 This happened in Rwanda. In 1994, after victory in the civil war, power passed to the Tutsi tribe. What has changed in this country? The only changes were that the Tutsi turned from persecuted into persecutors. It is possible that only when there is an awareness that for one tribe there is a threat of complete destruction (Tutsi), and for another the threat of retribution (Hutu), the hatred and mutual hostility of the two tribes disappears, and there will be a desire to resolve the conflict peacefully. But this is impossible without strengthening democratic institutions built on the principles of respect for human rights.
New challenges and threats at the beginning of the 21st century. The UN Security Council and its role in the fight against international terrorism
At the beginning of the 21st century, the world community failed to cope with all global challenges: war, terrorism, poverty and threats to human rights, regional and interethnic conflicts, environmental threats, the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. But, of course, the most pressing is terrorism.
Terrorist attacks that occurred recent years showed that international terrorism has acquired global character and has no geographical boundaries. They are carried out with a large number victims, “cultivating suicide bombers,” with the development of new hostage-taking technologies, instilling an atmosphere of fear and disorganization of society. According to V. Putin, the main weapon of terrorists is not bullets, grenades, bombs, but blackmail civilian population and states. The success of a terrorist operation requires thorough reconnaissance of the target, surprise, maneuverability of the group and decisive action.62
After the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York, the world realized the need to unite in the fight against terrorism. The Security Council has done a tremendous amount of work; it has formed an anti-terrorist coalition operating under the auspices of the UN, on the basis of resolutions and conventions adopted by the UN Security Council. UN anti-terrorism activities are reflected in 12 international conventions and 46 UN Security Council resolutions. A special place Resolution 1373 ranks among them.
To build up multilateral cooperation in the fight against terrorism, the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1373 on September 28, 2001. It was adopted in response to one of the most dangerous challenges of our time. It provides for measures to comprehensively address the external fueling of international terrorism. The measures provided for in this resolution are binding on all states. Sanctions are provided for states that do not adhere to the requirements of this resolution. Of course, all states must adhere to these requirements, because “the Security Council has qualified acts of international terrorism as a threat to international peace and security.” It has important political significance, as it strengthens the political and legal basis for the formation of a broad international anti-terrorist coalition designed to decisively counter this most acute global challenge based on the UN Charter and generally accepted norms of international law.”63
In accordance with this resolution, each state is obliged to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in other states. It is very important in the fight against terrorism, as it obliges states to take the following actions: preventing and suppressing the financing of terrorist acts; introduction criminal liability for the intentional provision or collection of funds, by any means, directly or indirectly, by their citizens or on their territory; in case of identification of persons committing or attempting to commit terrorist acts, block funds, other financial assets, economic resources; prohibit its citizens or any persons and organizations on its territory from providing any funds, financial assets or economic resources, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of persons who commit or attempt to commit terrorist acts; take the necessary measures to suppress the commission of terrorist acts, through early warning to other states, through the exchange of information; deny asylum to those who finance, plan, support or commit terrorist acts; take all measures to ensure that those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts do not use their territory for these purposes against other states; bring to justice persons involved in the financing, planning, preparation or commission of terrorist acts. Classify terrorist attacks as serious criminal offences; cooperate with each other in the course of a criminal investigation or prosecution related to the financing or support of terrorist acts; prevent the movement of terrorists or terrorist groups through effective border controls.64 But, it should be noted that for the effective application of all these measures in practice, it is necessary to intensify and accelerate the exchange of operational information, in accordance with international law and domestic legislation; cooperate within the framework of bilateral and multilateral mechanisms and agreements; ensure that, in accordance with international law, the organizers of terrorist acts and their accomplices do not abuse refugee status, and references to political motives are not recognized as a basis for rejecting requests for the extradition of suspects.
Thus, resolution 1373 contributes to the unification of the efforts of all countries in the fight against international terrorism; it covers not only political issues related to this problem, but financial and legal ones. Creates a legal foundation on which countries can build to counter this threat. Financing and supporting persons committing or attempting to commit terrorist acts is a criminal offense. The measures provided for by this resolution are aimed at strengthening the mechanism for monitoring the implementation of this sanctions regime and increasing the level of cooperation in fulfilling the requirements of Security Council resolutions.
Resolution 1373 is based on the articles of the seventh chapter of the UN Charter, and defines terrorism as a threat to universal peace and security, but does not clearly define the concept of “terrorist”; this allows each state to maneuver and act at its own discretion.
The Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) was created to monitor the fulfillment by all states of their obligations in anti-terrorism activities. On February 20, 2003, an open meeting of the UN Security Council was held on the issues of combating international terrorism. Those present expressed their opinion on the need for further comprehensive support for the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the UN Security Council, and the main areas of activity of the CTC were identified:
1. establishing cooperation between the Committee and regional structures;
2. providing technical assistance to states in building up anti-terrorist capabilities, preventing a possible link between “terrorists and weapons of mass destruction.”
The main factors of the ineffectiveness of the UN mechanism in resolving international crises and prospects for the development of the UN
Increasingly in recent years, one can hear criticism of the UN regarding the ineffectiveness of its operations, the tools used and methods used to resolve a particular conflict. But if we objectively consider the current situation, we can note that along with fatal mistakes, there were also successful peacekeeping operations. Miscalculations and mistakes are due to the fact that in the modern dynamic, rapidly developing world, it found itself in an unusual situation, where interstate conflicts gave way to civil wars, the collapse of the bipolar world led to the creation of new states, and new types of threats to international peace and security appeared. There is a decline in the role of the UN and the Security Council. Increasingly, there are violations of UN principles, ignoring UN Security Council resolutions, and the application of sanctions against some countries in violation of the decisions of the Council Members. But is it possible in this situation to say that the reduction in the role of the UN, the violation of its principles, the use of force, is due to ineffectiveness in the activities of the UN, its inability to respond to the current situation in a timely and adequate manner? Of course not. In our opinion, this is happening for one reason, which is that the USA, Great Britain and other countries neglect the norms of international law. One of the main criticisms leveled at the activities of the UN is the inability of the UN to quickly respond and make decisions that help prevent conflict. In our opinion, this argument is not sufficiently substantiated, since the UN System of Standby Agreements is functioning successfully. States that have joined this system maintain a high state of readiness for troops and equipment to be provided, if necessary, for peacekeeping operations under the auspices of the UN, and the intensity of the process of deepening cooperation between the UN and regional organizations leads to a coalition of states in order to quickly respond to crisis situations. In our opinion, one of the main factors reducing the role of the UN in resolving international conflicts is that it was unable to remove the presence of WMD and nuclear weapons from the control of sovereign states. After the Cold War, there was hope that the arms race would stop, but a reverse wave followed - even not rich countries are trying to acquire nuclear weapons, because the presence nuclear weapons is the only way to protect ourselves from the threat from major nuclear powers.
Another factor in the ineffectiveness of the mechanism was revealed in the process of analyzing the experience of the UN in resolving conflicts, for example, Yugoslavia or Abkhazia, it only manages to stop hostilities or transfer the conflict to the post-war period. But the cause of the conflict cannot be eliminated, which returns the situation to its original position. The cessation of hostilities does not eliminate the cause of the conflict, but only delays the solution of the problem, postponing its solution indefinitely.
But there is another point of view. According to many analysts, the UN's failure to fulfill its charter mission is due to the fact that disputes and threatening situations should be placed on the Security Council agenda only by the parties directly affected. But this contradicts the provision of Article 36 of the Charter, according to which “any member of the UN may refer to the Security Council or the General Assembly any dispute or any situation that may lead to international friction or dispute.” But in our opinion, in this case, a situation arises in which, if the disputing parties for some reason are not concerned that the issue be referred to them for consideration (For example, as was the case with the USA and the USSR during the Vietnam War or with Iran and Iraq in 1980), the issue will not be discussed at all, which means that the main mechanism that the founders of the UN hoped for - third-party pressure on the parties directly involved in the conflict to achieve a settlement will not be used. But at the same time, armed intervention by third countries in conflicts related to the struggle for secession could only take place with the approval of the Security Council and so that the international community would not recognize secession and the formation of a new state if it occurred against the will of the “mother” state.94
The effectiveness of the UN is directly influenced by the Secretary General. Since, given the fluctuations in the Security Council, one could hope that it is the Secretary General who is responsible for ensuring that a situation that could lead to war is considered by the Council at an early stage in accordance with Article 99 “... The Secretary General has the right to bring to the attention of the Council Security Council on any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security." The lack of completeness of information also reduces the efficiency of the Secretary General, preventing timely decisions to be made to resolve disputes. But it is not only the lack of completeness of information that hinders the activities of the UN Secretary General. So, according to Boutros Gali Boutros, who was the UN Secretary General from 1991-1996, he should have independence and autonomy in decision-making, as provided for in the UN Charter.95
As the next factor, I would like to note the so-called “timeliness factor”, which consists in the fact that the Council does nothing until the conflict reaches the stage of open war, and the pace of decision-making on peacekeeping operations in “hot spots” and the rules that were followed when determining the parameters of such operations are not acceptable and are largely outdated. In turn, this is contrary to the UN Charter, namely in accordance with Article 34 of the UN Charter “The UN Security Council is authorized to investigate any dispute or any situation that may lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, to determine whether the continuation of this dispute or situations threaten the maintenance of international peace and security,” it follows from this article that the Council must examine situations that have not reached the stage of open conflict and determine whether the situation may become a source of conflict. Chapter VI of the UN Charter outlines a whole range of procedures that the UN Security Council must carry out to prevent disagreements that could lead to friction. These include: investigations (Article 34), consideration of Article 35 “Any member of the organization may report any dispute or situation of the nature specified in Art. 34, to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly", a state that is not a Member of the UN may also bring to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly any dispute to which it is a party if it has accepted obligations in advance with respect to this dispute peaceful resolution of disputes provided for in this Charter, and in accordance with Art. 36, the UN Security Council is empowered, at any stage of a dispute the continuation of which might threaten the maintenance of international peace and security, to recommend appropriate procedures or methods of settlement. In Art. 33 reflects that the parties to the conflict must, first of all, try to resolve the dispute through negotiations, investigation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, litigation, recourse to regional bodies or agreements, or other peaceful means of their choice. All these methods are aimed at preventing the situation from reaching an armed conflict. Unfortunately, today the UN Security Council does not adhere to these articles of the Charter and remains inactive until the situation reaches the stage that threatens international peace and security. Sometimes intervention occurs at a time when it is very difficult to resolve the conflict, and sometimes it is not even possible.
The most significant role in the system of international relations at the present stage is played by the United Nations (UN). It became practically the first mechanism in history for broad, multifaceted interaction between different states in order to maintain peace and security and promote the economic and social progress of all peoples.
The most important goals of the United Nations are to stop the proliferation of weapons and to reduce and ultimately eliminate all stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. The United Nations serves as a permanent forum for negotiations on disarmament, making recommendations and initiating research in this area. It supports multilateral negotiations taking place within the Conference on Disarmament and other international bodies. As a result of these negotiations, such international agreements were concluded as - the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (1968), - the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (1996) - treaties on the creation of nuclear weapon-free zones.
The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, through a system of safeguards agreements, is responsible for ensuring that nuclear materials and equipment intended for peaceful purposes are not used for military purposes.
The fundamentals of the UN’s activities and its structure were developed during the Second World War by leading participants Anti-Hitler coalition.
The UN Charter was approved at the San Francisco Conference held from April to June 1945. According to it, “admission to membership of the Organization is open to all peace-loving states that accept the obligations contained in the Charter of the United Nations and which, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to fulfill these obligations.” The admission of states to membership of the United Nations is carried out by decision of the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council.
The UN General Assembly is considering the principles of cooperation in the field of ensuring international peace and security; elects non-permanent members of the UN Security Council, members of the Economic and Social Council; on the recommendation of the Security Council, appoints the UN Secretary-General; jointly with the Security Council, elects members of the International Court of Justice; coordinates international cooperation in the economic, social, cultural and humanitarian spheres; exercises other powers provided for in the UN Charter. The General Assembly has a sessional order of work. It may hold regular, special and emergency special sessions. The annual regular session of the Assembly opens on the third Tuesday in September.
Special sessions of the UN General Assembly may be convened on any issue at the request of the Security Council or at the request of a majority of UN members within 15 days from the date of receipt of such a request by the UN Secretary-General.
Emergency special sessions may be convened at the request of the UN Security Council or a majority of UN member states within 24 hours of receipt of such a request by the UN Secretary-General.
The UN Economic and Social Council is established by the Charter of the United Nations as the main body responsible for coordinating the economic, social and other related activities of the UN, as well as specialized agencies and organizations. Consists of 5 regional commissions for Europe, Africa, etc.
The seat of the International Court of Justice, established by the Charter of the United Nations as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, is The Hague, the Netherlands. The International Court of Justice is a forum for the peaceful settlement of legal disputes between states. The Court also prepares advisory opinions for the UN and its specialized agencies.
The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security; All members of the UN are obliged to obey its decisions.
The Security Council consists of 15 members: five members of the Council are permanent (Russia, USA, Great Britain, France and China, with veto power), the remaining ten members (in the terminology of the Charter - “non-permanent”) are elected to the Council in accordance with the procedure provided for Charter.
Each of the above structural divisions The UN has subsidiary bodies on various specialized issues (educational and research institutes, agencies, committees, commissions, working groups, tribunals, specialized institutions).
Within the framework of the UN, a number of organizations have emerged that have organically entered the system of international relations both as UN structures and as independent organizations. These include:
WHO (World Health Organization);
ILO ( International Association Labor);
IMF (International Monetary Fund);
UNESCO (Cultural and Scientific Organization);
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Organization);
UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development);
International Court of Justice.
UN reform. Since 2006 (after the 2005 World Summit), a number of reports on UN reform have been presented. The main problems of UN reform are:
1. Lack of representation in relation to developing countries.
2. The privileged position of permanent members of the UN Security Council.
3. The need to resolve the financial problems of the Organization with the only solution - granting rich economically developed countries the status of permanent or “semi-permanent” members of the Security Council.
Reform of the Security Council is one of the key and hotly debated areas of UN reform. For quite a long time, negotiations on this point could not get off the ground, but with the advent of the “twenty”, which is increasingly successfully winning back “ big eight» zones of influence, supporters of diplomatic innovations got a second wind.
The question also arises about the radicalness of reforming the Security Council. Most of the existing proposals for reforming the Security Council can be reduced to two groups.
First, various ideas to improve the effectiveness of the Council.
Supporters of radical reform of the Security Council believe that he usurped power in the UN, appropriated it to himself, a council of limited composition, controlled by its five permanent members who have the right of veto. As a result, the so-called “small countries” that do not have such a right cannot trust the Security Council.
One of the weighty arguments is the lack of application of the sanctions provisions of Article VII of the UN Charter to the United States and Great Britain after the events in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yugoslavia. In this regard, supporters of radical reform of the Security Council demand the transfer of powers of the Security Council to the General Assembly, which will ensure a more democratic decision-making process: application of the provisions Chapter VII The UN Charter should become the prerogative of the General Assembly, it should have the right to adopt binding resolutions, the Security Council should become an instrument for the implementation of resolutions of the General Assembly. In this case, the UN General Assembly, performing the functions of the world parliament, will remain the main legislative body and the Security Council will not be able to dictate its terms, remaining one of the executive bodies.
Secondly, proposals to change the composition of the Security Council.
In this case, the interests and influence of various countries and regions should be taken into account.
Countries of the “South”: they lack the material resources to support the functioning of the UN and the ability to influence the Security Council, so developing countries rely on limiting the veto power of permanent members of the Security Council. These countries are demanding greater participation in the UN decision-making process, expanding the number of permanent members to 11 countries based on the principle of equal geographical representation, and the Security Council should consist of 26 countries in total.
Countries of regional importance such as Italy, Spain, Turkey, Malaysia and some Scandinavian and Latin American countries want to formalize their status by lifting the ban on membership in the Security Council.
Highly developed countries (Germany, Japan), as well as representatives of all three regional groups of the developing world (India, Pakistan, Indonesia in Asia; Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa in Africa; Brazil and Argentina in Latin America) claim the title of permanent members of the Security Council.
Finally, the five current permanent members of the Council are united in their desire to maintain their current status, including the right of veto.
The United States has always actively advocated UN reform to increase the number of its allies in the organization. Back in the 70s, Washington put forward the idea of “quickfix” - the inclusion of Germany and Japan in the Security Council as permanent members. This would increase the number of American allies in the Security Council and at the same time reduce the size of US contributions to the UN budget, non-payment of which has become the main financial problem of the Organization. In the 1990s, under pressure from developing countries, Washington changed the “quickfix” to the “2+3” formula (Germany, Japan, plus one country from each region of the developing world). In 2000, the Bill Clinton administration agreed to expand the Security Council to more than 23 members.
Russia's position is ambiguous. Initially, based on the commitments given to Japan and Germany by Yeltsin, only these two candidates were supported. Subsequently, Russia's position was that the Security Council should include both industrialized and developing countries. The number of members of the expanded Security Council, according to Russia, should not exceed 20-21.
In the future, UN reform should concern:
1. freeing him from the political situation and bureaucratic fetters,
2. a sharp increase in the speed of response to crises and conflicts,
3. transferring the main organizational work, primarily the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, from New York “to the field.”
An example of a balanced decision within the framework of UN reform is the fate of the Commission on Human Rights: having lost confidence, it was disbanded. The commission was overly politicized and used by states to selectively criticize each other rather than solve real problems. The commission was replaced by the Human Rights Council, whose 47 members are elected by the UN General Assembly. The General Assembly is authorized, by a vote of two-thirds of its members, to suspend the rights and privileges of a member of the Council if he has persistently committed gross and systematic violations of human rights.
On September 8, 2000, the General Assembly adopted a landmark document - the UN Millennium Declaration. In it, states noted the values and principles that should be fundamental in the 21st century. In particular, the declaration set the vector for further transformation of the UN system and activities.
Since ancient times, to resolve conflicts, a third party has been involved, who intervened between the conflicting parties in order to find a peaceful solution. Usually the most respected people in society acted as the third party. In medieval Europe, before they were formed nation states, the Pope played the most important role as a third party in resolving conflicts. Acting more as a judge than as a mediator, he decided how the dispute should end. However, later the role of the Pope in resolving conflicts decreased significantly.
From the moment of their formation to the present, national states have been and are very actively acting as a third party in resolving conflicts, since conflicts, especially armed ones, have always directly affected their interests. However, the world has become more complex, therefore, along with states, third parties in it can and often are groups of states united to resolve a specific conflict; international universal and regional organizations; church; informal (non-governmental) institutions and organizations, and in some cases - individuals making efforts to peacefully resolve the conflict. Moreover, it should be noted that the role of other, non-governmental, participants in conflict resolution in the modern world is increasing.
One of such mediators at the present stage is the United Nations. Back in 1945, the UN Charter intended the future organization high role in maintaining international peace and security. Initially, it was to consider threats to peace, acts of aggression, disputes and conflicts between states. The Security Council, based on the consensus and military power of its five permanent members, was supposed to carry out peaceful resolution of disputes, eliminate, suppress threats to peace and acts of aggression or counter them with force. General principles of international peace and security, including principles for the guidance of disarmament and arms control, were to be the subject of consideration by the General Assembly and recommendations addressed to member states or the Security Council.
Over the 55 years of its existence, the UN has accumulated a lot of experience in resolving armed conflicts. However, in the 90s of the twentieth century, the nature of armed conflicts changed. The vast majority of clashes currently are internal. The resolution of an intrastate conflict collides with the sovereignty of individual states, which often do not want outside interference in their national policy. Therefore, already in the mid-90s, based on the experience of conflict resolution, the development of a strategy for the prevention of armed conflicts began.
But each conflict is unique in nature, so at this stage it is not yet possible to create a universal early warning system. However, the creation of such a system, which will have data on the socio-economic situation in various countries, is one of the most important areas of activity of UN research centers.
Identifying the very first signs of an armed conflict today is based on monitoring the situation directly at the regional level. In this area, the UN relies on its representatives in various countries around the world, regional organizations, NGOs and civil society. In addition, according to Article 35 of the Charter of the United Nations, any Member of the United Nations or any interested non-Member State may bring to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly any dispute or situation which may give rise to international friction and give rise to a dispute .
But, unfortunately, according to some authors, the UN has shown itself to be poorly prepared to prevent conflicts. As Urquhart B. points out in his article, “by the new organization of the United Nations” “everyone knew that Yugoslavia after the death of Tito was not a stable state...”, “it was also known in advance about most of the current conflicts. And yet, despite all the talk about the desirability of preventive action, no preventive efforts were made.” As the author points out, the actions taken by the UN were reactive and motivated by criticism from the media and the public, they were also slow and inadequate. And this does not fit into the UN concept of conflict prevention at all.
If the conflict moves to the next stage of armed conflict, then the UN carries out various operations to maintain and restore peace, for example, introducing peacekeeping forces. The assistance of the UN armed forces ("blue helmets") is often resorted to in the event of an armed conflict. They are multinational formations, the creation of which on the basis of a decision of the Security Council is provided for by the UN Charter. The idea of using armed forces under the auspices of the UN was put forward during the settlement of the Suez crisis in 1956 by the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs L. Piersen (for which he received the Nobel Peace Prize) and was supported by the then general secretary UN D. Hammarskjöld. Subsequently, UN troops participated in peacekeeping operations in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Central America. Thus, in 1973, UN troops were quickly deployed in the Middle East, which helped reduce tensions caused by the advance of Israeli troops deeper into Egyptian territory. The UN armed forces also performed peacekeeping functions in Cyprus, Lebanon and many other “hot spots” on the planet. Peacekeeping forces can remain in a conflict zone for a long time, remaining there even after agreements are reached, as was the case, for example, in Cyprus, where their task was to prevent clashes between representatives of the Greek and Turkish communities. In Cyprus, they acted as a guarantor that a new round of armed confrontation would not begin.
Use peacekeeping forces The UN was preceded by the activities of military observers, which later became quite widespread. A group of UN military observers was present in India and Pakistan, in the Middle East. The task of military observers (and this is where they differ from “observers of the negotiations”) comes down mainly to monitoring the implementation of the truce, identifying facts of its violation and submitting reports to the UN Security Council.
Simultaneously with the introduction of peacekeeping forces, a buffer zone is often created in order to separate the armed forces of the warring parties. The introduction of free-fly zones is also practiced in order to prevent air strikes by one of the parties to the conflict. In particular, such zones were introduced in the airspace of Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of UN Security Council Resolution No. 781 of October 9, 1992, and in March 1993, in development of this resolution, the Security Council adopted a new resolution. According to which, the use of all necessary measures in the event of further violation of airspace was authorized.
In some conflicts, the military is tasked with additional features, including delivery humanitarian aid civilians (this function was actively implemented, in particular, in the Bosnian conflict), ensuring the holding of free elections (as, for example, in Namibia).
However, along with the positive aspects, the use of armed units has a number of limitations and negative aspects.
First of all, peacekeeping troops cannot always be brought in. The states into whose territory they are introduced must give consent to their deployment. Countries may refuse to accept peacekeeping troops, considering the deployment of the latter as interference in their internal affairs. The problem of the neutrality of armed formations is quite acute: the extent to which they are perceived by the warring parties as neutral, and not supporting one or another side in the conflict. They are often attacked by both sides, who accuse them of partiality and bias.
The problem of neutrality can be partially solved by the simultaneous introduction of various troops (collective peacekeeping forces). Such actions make it possible to increase the “degree of objectivity” to some extent, although they do not completely eliminate the problem: and with the simultaneous introduction different countries peacekeeping troops, they may be accused of bias. In addition, when introducing collective peacekeeping forces, another problem often arises - a discrepancy in the assessment of the situation among various actors in the peacekeeping process. In this case, the effectiveness of their actions is called into question. In addition, there is a danger of conflict between those countries whose troops were brought in.
Another way that allows us to slightly increase the level of perception of the troops being introduced as neutral is to follow the UN principle, according to which a country located in a conflict-ridden region and directly or indirectly interested in one or another outcome usually does not participate in the settlement. For the same reason, the dominant power in the region should not have any advantages in carrying out peacekeeping actions. However, in practice this principle is difficult to implement. The argument here, as a rule, is to protect national security and ensure the rights of its citizens located in the conflict zone.
And finally, the most big problem is that the introduction of peacekeeping forces does not replace a political settlement of the conflict. This act can only be considered temporary - for the period of searching for a peaceful solution.
Another common means of influence by a third party on parties to conflicts, which is restrictive and coercive in nature, is the imposition of sanctions. Sanctions are quite widely used in international practice. They are introduced by states on their own initiative or by decision of international organizations. The imposition of sanctions is provided for by the UN Charter in the event of a threat to peace, a violation of the peace or an act of aggression on the part of any state.
Unlike the introduction of peacekeeping forces, sanctions do not imply the consent of the person against whom they are imposed. There are different types of sanctions. Trade sanctions cover the import and export of goods and technology, with particular emphasis on those that could be used for military purposes. Financial sanctions include prohibitions or restrictions on the provision of loans, credit, as well as investments. Political sanctions are also used, for example, expulsion of the aggressor from international organizations and severance of diplomatic relations with him.
As M.M. Lebedeva points out, the following considerations usually serve as arguments for applying sanctions to the warring parties:
- * “developing relations with a state that does not strive for a peaceful resolution of contradictions means political and economic support for the conflict;
- * many types of products, especially in the electronics industry, can be used by parties to the conflict for military purposes, which also to a greater extent will increase the conflict;
- * if foreign companies or foreign capital play a significant role in the economy of the conflicting countries, their withdrawal will weaken the regime of the authorities, and this may contribute to a change in its political course regarding the conflict.”
Along with the positive aspects, sanctions, like the introduction of armed forces by a third party, are fraught with many negative consequences. First of all, sanctions themselves do not solve the problem of political settlement of the conflict. Introduced to induce participants to end the conflict, sanctions lead to the isolation of these countries from the outside world. As a result, the ability to influence the conflict from the outside in order to find its resolution through peaceful means is limited.
Another problem is related to the fact that the introduction of sanctions damages not only the economy of the country against which they are imposed, but also the economy of the state imposing sanctions. This happens especially in cases where these countries had close economic and trade ties and relationships before the imposition of sanctions.
In connection with these and many other problems in resolving international conflicts, Urquhart in his article proposes various measures for reforming the UN, which should help the UN become a “substantial and effective instrument of world order.” These measures include:
- 1. it is necessary to create an effective early warning system based on economic, social, as well as political information,
- 2. create a special UN forum where leaders of ethnic and other oppressed groups could present their problems and receive recommendations on how to resolve them from experts,
- 3. it is necessary to position the Security Council in favor of preventive measures, which will require greater willingness on the part of governments to accept UN assistance,
- 4. it is necessary to reorganize the Security Council in order to make it more representative and thereby give it greater legitimacy,
- 5. it is necessary to develop the legal basis for UN operations with the prospect of developing it into a generally accepted international legal and constitutional system with appropriate monitoring and, if necessary, an enforcement mechanism,
- 6. it is necessary to create conditions under which, under the influence public opinion and international organizations, governments of all countries would make efforts to solve problems related to arms control,
- 7. It is necessary to create a permanent, well-trained and morally prepared rapid reaction group, independent of the consent of governments to provide troops.
Urquhart also proposes some other reform measures. But, despite all the listed shortcomings of the UN in the field of conflict resolution, its role as a guarantor of peace and security in resolving international conflicts is very great. And it is this organization that carries out various complex operations related to establishing and maintaining peace and provides various humanitarian assistance.
international political globalization
Powers and functions of the UN Security Council
The Security Council is one of the main organs of the UN and plays a major role in maintaining international peace and security.
The Security Council consists of 15 members: five permanent (Russia, USA, Great Britain, France, China) and ten non-permanent, elected in accordance with the UN Charter. The list of permanent members is fixed in the UN Charter. Non-permanent members are elected by the UN General Assembly for two years without the right of immediate re-election.
The Security Council is empowered to investigate any dispute or situation that may give rise to international friction or give rise to a dispute, to determine whether the continuation of that dispute or situation is likely to threaten international peace and security. At any stage of such a dispute or situation, the Council may recommend the appropriate procedure or methods of settlement.
The parties to a dispute, the continuation of which may threaten international peace or security, have the right to independently decide to refer the dispute to the Security Council for resolution. However, if the Security Council considers that the continuation of a given dispute may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security, it may recommend such terms for the settlement of the dispute as it considers appropriate.
A non-UN member state may also bring attention to any dispute to which it is a party if, in relation to that dispute, it accepts in advance the obligations of the peaceful settlement of disputes provided for in the UN Charter.
In addition, the Security Council determines the existence of any threat to the peace, any breach of the peace or act of aggression and makes recommendations to the parties or decides what measures should be taken to restore international peace and security. The Council may require the parties to the dispute to implement such provisional measures as it deems necessary. Security Council decisions are binding on all UN members.
The Council is also empowered to decide what measures, other than the use of military force, should be used to implement its decisions, and to require members of the organization to implement these measures. These measures may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations, rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio or other means of communication, as well as severance of diplomatic relations.
If the Security Council considers that these measures are or have proven to be insufficient, it may take such action by air, sea or ground forces which will be necessary to maintain or restore peace and security. UN member states undertake to place at the disposal of the Council the armed forces necessary to maintain peace.
It must be taken into account that the UN Charter in no way affects the inalienable right of each state to individual or collective self-defense in the event of an armed attack on a UN member until the Security Council takes appropriate measures to maintain peace and security.
Each member state of the Security Council has one representative here. The Security Council sets its own rules of procedure, including the procedure for electing its President.
Decisions in the Security Council on issues of procedure are considered adopted if nine members of the Council vote for them. On other issues, decisions are considered adopted when nine members of the Council vote for them, including the concurring votes of all permanent members of the Council, and the party involved in the dispute must abstain from voting. If, when voting on a non-procedural issue, one of the permanent members of the Council votes against, the decision is considered not adopted (veto power).
The Security Council may establish subsidiary bodies necessary for the performance of its functions. Thus, to assist the Security Council on the use of troops placed at its disposal and the regulation of weapons, a Military Staff Committee was created, consisting of the chiefs of staff of the permanent members of the Security Council or their representatives.
Structure of the UN Security Council
Article 29 of the Charter of the United Nations states that the Security Council may establish such subsidiary organs as it finds necessary for the performance of its functions. This is also reflected in rule 28 of the Council's Provisional Rules of Procedure.
All current committees and working groups consist of 15 Council members. While the standing committees are chaired by the President of the Council, whose position is filled on a monthly rotation basis, other committees and working groups are chaired or co-chaired by nominated members of the Council, whose names are presented annually in a note by the President of the Security Council.
The mandates of subsidiary bodies, whether committees or working groups, range from procedural issues (e.g. documentation and procedures, meetings away from Headquarters) to substantive issues (e.g. sanctions regimes, counter-terrorism, peacekeeping operations).
The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) are subsidiary organs of the Security Council within the meaning of Article 29 of the Charter. As such, they are dependent on the United Nations for administrative and financial matters, but as judicial bodies they are independent of any state or group of states, including their constituent body, the Security Council.
Committees
Counter-Terrorism and Non-Proliferation Committee
Counter-Terrorism Committee established pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001)
Committee to Prevent the Proliferation of Nuclear, Chemical or Biological Weapons and Their Means of Delivery (1540 Committee).
Military Staff Committee
The Military Staff Committee helps plan United Nations military measures and regulate weapons.
Sanctions Committees (Ad Hoc)
The use of mandatory sanctions is intended to put pressure on a state or entity to adhere to the goals determined by the Security Council without resorting to the use of force. Thus, for the Security Council, sanctions are one of the important tools for ensuring compliance with its decisions. Because of its universal nature, the United Nations is a particularly suitable body to introduce such measures and monitor their application.
The Council resorts to binding sanctions as a means of enforcing its decisions when peace is threatened and diplomatic efforts have failed. Sanctions include comprehensive economic and trade sanctions and/or targeted measures such as arms embargoes, travel bans, and financial or diplomatic restrictions.
Standing committees and special bodies
Standing committees are open-ended bodies and are usually established to deal with certain procedural matters, such as the admission of new members. Special committees are established for a limited period of time to resolve a particular issue.
Peacekeeping operations and political missions
A peacekeeping operation involves military, police and civilian personnel who work to provide security, political and early peacebuilding support. Peacekeeping activities are flexible and have been implemented in numerous configurations over the past two decades. Today's multidimensional peacekeeping operations are designed not only to maintain peace and security, but also to facilitate political processes, provide protection for civilians, and assist in the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants; provide support for the organization of elections, protect and promote human rights and assist in restoring the rule of law.
Political missions are one element in a range of United Nations peace operations that operate at different stages of the conflict cycle. In some cases, after peace agreements are signed, the political missions managed during the peace negotiation phase by the Department of Political Affairs are replaced by peacekeeping missions. In some cases, United Nations peacekeeping operations are being replaced by special political missions whose mission is to monitor longer-term peacebuilding activities.
International courts and tribunals
The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 1993 after widespread violations of humanitarian law were committed in the former Yugoslavia during military operations. It was the first post-war tribunal established by the United Nations to prosecute war crimes, and the first to prosecute war crimes since the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals, which were established at the end of the Second World War. The Tribunal tries those individuals who are primarily responsible for heinous acts such as murder, torture, rape, slavery and destruction of property, as well as other violent crimes. Its goal is to ensure justice is served for thousands of victims and their families and thus contribute to the establishment of lasting peace in the area. As of the end of 2011, the Tribunal had convicted 161 people.
The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in 1994 to prosecute those responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda between 1 January and 31 December 1994. It may also prosecute Rwandan citizens who committed acts of genocide and other similar violations of international law in neighboring countries during the same period. In 1998, the Rwanda Tribunal became the first international court, who pronounced sentence in the case of genocide, and also for the first time in history imposed punishment for such a crime.
Advisory subsidiary body
The Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) is an intergovernmental advisory body that supports efforts to bring peace to countries emerging from conflict, and is an important complementary tool for the international community to contribute to its broader peace agenda.
The Peacebuilding Commission plays a unique role in terms of:
ensuring coordinated engagement among all relevant actors, including international donors, international financial institutions, national governments and troop-contributing countries;
resource mobilization and allocation;
The Peacebuilding Commission is an advisory subsidiary body to both the Security Council and the General Assembly.
Related articles
The best amulets against the evil eye and damage Amulet against the evil eye with hands for children
How to read the Psalter correctly
Delicious dishes with sausages
A glimpse of Bella. Romantic chronicle. A glimpse of genius. Messerer about Akhmadulina Boris Messerer glimpse of Bella romantic chronicle
I dreamed that I was sailing on a boat on the river
How to cook beef entrecote in a frying pan
About the company Foreign language courses at Moscow State University
Which city and why became the main one in Ancient Mesopotamia?
Why Bukhsoft Online is better than a regular accounting program!
Which year is a leap year and how to calculate it