Category: United Nations

The waters of Gulf of Eden along the Somali coast are among the most heavily trafficked in the globe. Approximately 20,000 vessels pass through these waters every year (Kraska and Brian 25). In the early 2003, new incidences of attack on fishing vessels started taking place along the Somali coast.

The frequency of these attacks increased exponentially and companies started to become more worried as the attacks also targeted commercial vessels. The last three years has recorded the highest activities of the pirates in the Gulf of Eden, with over 100 attacks on commercial vessels (Middleton 2).

In response to these attacks, the United Nation’s Security Council passed resolutions 1816 and 1838 in 2008, to facilitate the international community to aggressively take part in the management of security in the Horn of Africa and of Somali coast. The U.N resolution particularly targeted the Somali pirates.

The NATO forces were given more mandates to help commercial vessels passing through the Somali coast against piracy. Prior to the resolution, France had volunteered to protect World Food Program’s ships passing through Somalia. This initiative was known as Operation Alycon and was replaced by EU NAVFOR Somalia Operation Atlanta 2008 (Kraska and Brian 25).

In 2008, the international media was dominated with news on the cases of kidnappings, killings and terrorist attacks in the Horn of Africa. The news agenda of these media houses changed all over sudden when the pirates operating from tiny ports and harbors along the Somali coast carried out a successful attack against commercial vessels from Europe, the first vessel originating from Ukraine which had carried heavy armory heading to Southern Sudan.

Towards the end of the same year, the pirates landed another successful attack on a Saudi-Owned oil tanker. By the end of 2008, pirate gang operating from Eyl, Haradheere and other harbors along the isolated coast of Puntland, were reported to be holding over 41 vessels at ransom, with over 200 crew members also captured. The main aim of this paper is to investigate the role of UAE in Somali. The paper will also explore the historical context of piracy, the UN position on piracy and the position of on piracy in Somali (Middleton 2).

Brief History on Somali Piracy

The Somali coast for many years has been a maritime community. The main activities in this coast are: fishing, international maritime trade, and sea-faring tradition of dhow sailing among others (Kraska and Brian 25). Somali piracy is intimately linked to the early stages of civil war in Somalia and international interventions.

Prior to the collapse of Barre’s government in 1991, there were a number of attacks on the international vessels. However, with the collapse of the Somalia government, there were struggles for ports and harbor facilities and other economic resources by the Somali elites (Gosse 7).

Towards the late 1989, a Somali rebel faction, known as Somali National Movement, captured an oil tanker and a couple of other ships as a warning to the international shipping companies from dealing with the present regime.

They offloaded everything that was in these vessels before releasing them in the early 90s. Since then, the interference with the international shipping along the Somali coast has been rising slowly and the main reason for this is the significance attached to the maritime resources (Kraska and Brian 26).

Historical context of piracy can clearly be explained in relation to the fishing industry. After a successful spell in the early 1960s, the ships and infrastructure in Somali particularly in Mogadishu were slowly worn out and became obsolete in 1977.

In 1983 the then Somali government signed a contract with an Italian company (Somali High Seas Fishing Company, also known as SHIFCO), which boosted the fishing by providing a fleet of trawlers and a freezer mother ship to help in exporting fish to Italy and other European countries.

When the Somali government collapsed in the early 90s, the Italian company shifted its base to Yemen, from where it was still run by the close associates of the ousted president. In an attempt to gain monopoly of the fishing industry of the Gulf coast, the company was alleged to have bribed a number of the top political class to gain their support (Gosse 8).

Initially, this arrangement worked in the favor of the company, but after the fall of Barre’s government, the company started experiencing numerous challenges resulting from the fighting of former members of governments who were competing to control economic resources. The competing political elites started to support other fishing companies.

Simultaneously, other international fishing companies operating within the Somali waters also began to undermine SHIFCO’s monopoly. The UN Marchal reports tried to look at this problem in 1993 but chose not to interfere with SHIFCO’s contract. The rivaling political classes continued to compete against each other and were now fighting for tax revenue from the industry. They began to interfere with the trawlers operating off-shore (Gosse 9).

To effectively achieve their objective of taxing off-shore trawlers, the local sailors began to use speed boats and technological gadgets. The foundation of the state of Puntland was also based on taxing offshore fisheries. The government of Abdullaahi Yuusuf employed a private security company, Hart, to manage its ports and costal taxes.

The apparent liberalization and security measures embraced by the Puntland government played into the local politics between the competing factions in their quest to gain tribute. The security company hired by the Yuusuf’s government to administer its ports and custom revenues failed to gain control of the Puntland port.

Nevertheless, the company had employed and trained many locals on the use of maritime technologies such as GPS, maritime tracking and security systems, and the techniques of capturing, boarding and securing a suspected vessel in hostile waters. Many researchers believe that the training this company gave to the locals has contributed significantly to the attack of vessels in the Somali waters (Kraska and Brian 27).

With the combination of advanced technologies and expertise in the tracking and communication gadgets, heavy artilleries for piercing hull of vessels, outstanding local knowledge of the coastal waters, have enabled the professional pirate gangs to even run down the international shipping vessels several miles off-shore.

The escalation of piracy in Somalia initially started as an informal alliance between fishermen and the local militias. The fishermen responsibility was marine navigation while the militias were v involved in hijacking marine vessels and taking care of the gang onshore. Ransoms are divided with respect to the rules of fishery industry where the first consideration is given to the owners and the fishermen, then off-shore operators and onshore recruits selling the catches, and so on (Kraska and Brian 28).

The effects of piracy on the region and the globe

The increase of pirates attacks in the coast of Somalia is directly associated with the persistent insecurity and the nonexistence of the rule of law in war-ravaged nation of Somalia. Lack of fully functioning government in Somalia has given pirates freedom of action and therefore, piracy remains the biggest security challenge in the Horn of Africa.

The absence of the rule of law and the security agencies in some parts of Somali coast has given pirates a haven where they can hold hostages for several months as they negotiate for the ransom. Some of these pirates allege that lack of coastal security has encouraged illegal international fishing and maritime dumping, which on the other hand has the economic prospect of the coastal communities. This has provided both economic and political impetus for pirates in Somalia.

However, the main motive of piracy is profit as it has proven to be a very lucrative venture. The piracy economy in Somalia has risen tremendously over the last three years, with the ransoms currently averaging in excess of five million dollars. The local and international communities worry that the piracy revenue may further aggravate the continuing conflict and undermine security in the Horn of Africa (Ploch 2).

Piracy in the Horn of Africa has had a considerable impact on the shipping industry. There numerous costs attached to piracy and these included payment of ransoms, damage to the vessels, cargo delays, rising cost of maritime insurance, and cost of reinforcing security measures in the maritime vessels.

The consumers are the ultimate bearers of these costs. The overall piracy cost in the real sense is just a small fraction of the total value of the global maritime trade. Maritime Insurance underwriters designated the Gulf of Eden as war risk zone and subjected it to special premiums.

Generally, war risk insurance premiums charged by global insurance companies are very high. Depending on the size of the vessel, war risk premiums charged on the vessels passing through the Gulf of Eden rose from $500 per ship, per voyage to over $150000. The costs associated with piracy have resulted in increased cost of doing business among nations that depend on these waters, and has even encouraged more piracy (Ploch 3).

Piracy is also threatening the delivery of Humanitarian aid to the Horn of Africa, most of which arrives through sea. According to USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development), over 30 million people in Horn of Africa were affected by famine in 2011 but the delivery of humanitarian assistance was hampered by security situation in the Somali waters.

Food insecurity, as a result of drought and security problem, also increased due to fuel shortage in the region since most of the oil tankers had been captured by the pirates (Central Intelligence Agency 3).

There are great concerns that piracy has been used to finance regional conflicts and terrorism. Observers have expressed their worries that a fraction of revenue acquired through piracy has been used to purchase weapons that are used by pirates and area militia groups.

A Canadian intelligence report released in the late 2009 stated that Islamist militant group in Somalia known as Al Shabaab provided weapons, training and protection to the pirates in exchange for money, weapons or materials. Al Shabaab is an Al Qaida linked group and have committed numerous terrorist acts both within and without Somalia (Kraska and Brian 25).

UN position on piracy

There have been a lot of complaints from many leaders especially in African and some Arab states in relation to how the international community has neglected the war torn Somali. Most of these complaints are normally directed to powerful organization like UN and EU who have put a lot of focus in the Middle East neglecting other regions that experience similar situations.

Nonetheless, UN in collaboration with AMISON (African Union Mission in Somali) and the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia (TFG) have been working very closely in an attempt to restore stability in Somalia (United Nations 2).

United Nations Security Council have tried to address numerous challenges related to piracy in the Horn of Africa by passing a number of resolutions (1816, 1838, 1846, and 1851) in 2008.

These resolutions were aimed at preventing pirates from using the territorial waters off the Somali coast to avoid being captured, mobilized nations to send naval forces in the area, reinforced legal authorities to indict piracy suspects and enhanced collaboration and cooperation, especially with relation to the disposition of the captured suspects.

As a result of the direction offered by the United Nations Security Council resolution, the international contact group met in the early 2009 to address the collaborative efforts in tackling piracy in the Gulf of Eden. Those who attended this meeting included representatives from East African countries and Arab nations bordering the Gulf of Eden among others (Randall 5).

The meeting attended by the international contact group deliberated on how to improve operational and intelligence support to counter piracy, how to establish counter piracy operations, strengthening of the judicial structure for the arrest, prosecution and incarceration of piracy suspects, intensifying awareness among commercial shipping and other capabilities and following enhanced diplomatic and public information endeavors and upsetting the financial operations of the pirates. The group builds upon a UN report of 2008 related to piracy (United Nations 4).

United Nations has also adopted a code of conduct at International Maritime Organization that covers joint operations, commitment to share points of contact for propagating of piracy subjugation information and the establishment of a regional training centre which is based in Mombasa, a sub-regional coordination centre based in Dares salaam and information centre in Sana’a.

United Nations provides guidance and authority for the member states. The last two UN resolutions (1846 and 1851) offer significant legal authority for prosecuting and engaging pirates. United Nation do not direct military force nor oblige member states to indict piracy suspects. On the contrary, UN Security Council provides legal authority and call on member states to support investigative and legal action (United Nations 5).

The United Nations Convention on the law of the sea, which codifies conventional international laws, fundamentally sets out the international regime applicable to piracy. Article 100 of the convention fundamentally calls for all members to fully cooperate in the repression of piracy.

Article 101 of the convention defines what piracy is. The definition includes each and every unlawful acts of violence, confinement or destruction committed by crew or passengers of one ship to another ship or individuals in that ship. Such acts must be committed on the high seas, beyond the territory of any country. The definition also encompassed those who incite or help piracy suspects to commit these crimes (Randall 3).

There are a number of UN agencies that helps member states in prosecuting and imprisoning piracy suspects off the Somali coast and they include United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), United Nations Development Program (UNDP), United Nations Political Office for Somalia (UNPOS) and International Maritime Organization (IMO). UNODC runs aid programs in Kenya, Seychelles, Puntland and Somali land.

Kenya and Seychelles also benefit from aid given by the European Union and other states that passes through this agency. Aid given by the European Union and other states is basically delivered under UNODC Counter-Piracy program, though a number of them also offer significant help on bilateral basis.

IMO gives help to the regional maritime authorities to widen measures to minimize the chances of piracy attacks, and supports UNODC in assisting the countries within the region in reviewing and improving the counter-piracy laws. On the other hand, UNDP work in Somali courts and ensures that there is a fair and efficient trial in these courts (United NATIONS 8).

UAE’s position and role in fighting piracy in Somalia

United Arab Emirates, as a world transit hub, has been a major target of piracy in the Gulf region. In 2011 alone, pirates held captive about nine commercial vessels owned by the United Arab Emirates companies and those originating from its ports. Vessels originating from this country are most vulnerable because they carry crude oil.

The escalating fuel prices have forced large tankers to reduce their streaming speed, making them more vulnerable to pirate attacks. Pirates regard them as high value targets since they pay higher ransom than any other commercial vessels.

While other international shipping companies have the option of avoiding the Gulf of Eden route, owing to their location, UAE has no any other choice. In a nutshell, crude oil tankers from UAE transiting through the Arabian Sea will go on to provide a steady stream of pirate target (Al Bu-Ainnain 1).

Even though the international communities have been on the fore front in debating the piracy issue, the Gulf Coast Countries including UAE have the most to lose if the piracy problem is not addressed. In April 2001, the United Arab Emirates convened a high profile anti-piracy conference aimed at finding the long-term solution to the piracy problem in the Gulf Coast.

In the following year, the country hosted the Indian Ocean Naval symposium, a group comprising of 33 states in the Indian Ocean region, with Bahrain leading the Combined Task Force, under the supervision of the U.S. UAE has been very vocal in calling up the Gulf Coast Countries (GCC) to increase efforts in countering piracy in the Somali coast. In 2010, the UAE naval commander, Ibrahim al-Musharakah, called for the security of Gulf coast to be under lasting leadership of the GCC navies (Al Bu-Ainnain 2).

There is a potential for improved GCC leadership, but this goal still remains in the papers. Currently, GCC navies with the exception of Saudi Arabia lack the capacity to ensure security beyond their territorial waters. However, the GCC states in the recent past have been improving their naval capacity.

In the past two years, UAE has acquired 6 Corvettes from France, 24 amphibious assault ships, 70 transport and assault helicopters. The main aim of these acquisitions is to defend their own territorial waters and Gulf of Eden. UAE in collaboration with the U.S Navy have also conducted numerous rescue missions in the Somali Coast. The most recent one is the Abu Dhabi-owned vessel (MV arrilah-I) that was captured in the Somali waters (Al Bu-Ainnain 3).

UAE has played a significant role in averting humanitarian crisis in Somali brought by war and famine. The Somali militias and Al-shabaab (an Al-Qaeda affiliated militant group) which controls most parts of Somalia have banned most international aid agencies from operating in most parts of the country.

However, these groups have been more open to donor agencies from the Arab countries and UAE has played a major role in providing humanitarian assistance to the Somali people.

This has placed UAE emirates at the pole position in helping the international communities in dealing with crises in Somali including piracy problem. UAE operations in Somali have are firmly on the side of U.S and European Union, signifying the positive and productive relationship with the western countries. These countries also depend on UAE intelligence in tackling problems of the war-torn Somali (Al Bu-Ainnain 4).

In 2010, the UAE and the United Nations held a fundraising event in support of the Trust Fund to help the initiatives of nations countering piracy in the Gulf of Eden. The main objective of this fundraising was to attract the new and long-established donors to the fund.

The fundraising was established by the United Nations secretary general, Banki Moon, at the request of the international contact group on piracy off the Somali coast. The trust fund has been very instrumental in supporting war against piracy in the Gulf of Eden and has been an exceptional multilateral medium in funding land-based counter piracy initiatives. UAE donated one million dollars in this trust fund and has been advocating for public-private sector partnership in assisting international counter piracy initiatives (UAE 1).

There have also been allegations that elements of the Somali community living in United Arab Emirates have been involved in numerous activities which are undermining security in the Horn of Africa. These activities include piracy, transfer of illegal weapons in contravention of UN laws, and probably offering indirect financial aid to the Islamic rebel movements whom the Transitional Federal Government is trying to suppress (Al Bu-Ainnain 3).

According to intelligence reports the number of these individuals is not big but they have amassed considerable wealth. The piracy suspects are also believed to have invested considerable amount of their revenues in UAE and the countries neighboring Somali, particularly Kenya. A lot of focus is being given to Kenya because it also has a considerable number of Somali communities especially in the North Eastern part of the country (Middleton 5).

Conclusion

The increase in the number of pirate attack in the Somali coast and the entire Horn of Africa has led to a renewed international attention to the very old problem of maritime piracy. According to the international maritime organization, over 200 attacks to place in 2010 alone, out of which 49 were successful. Somali pirates attacks maritime vessels in the entire Gulf of Eden and have even gone as a far as Mozambique coast.

The rise in pirate attacks in Somali waters is attributed to persistent insecurity and lawlessness in Somalia. Piracy has negatively impacted maritime transport and global trade. Piracy in Somali is not new and can be traced back even before the fall of Barre’s government. The problem originated from the rivalry among the Somali political elites in their quests to control economic resources.

UN passed a number of counter piracy resolutions to facilitate the international community to aggressively take part in the management of security in the Horn of Africa and of Somali coast. United Arab Emirates, as a world transit hub, has been a major target of piracy in the Gulf region. UAE solely depends on Gulf of Eden route for its imports and exports and this is the reason why it has been on the fore front in the war against piracy on the Gulf of Eden.

Works Cited

Al Bu-Ainnain, Khaled A. The GCC and Piracy: An Arab Solution. Abu Dhabi: Institute for Near East & Gulf Military Analysis. 2011. Print.

Central Intelligence Agency. “The World Fact book – Somalia”. 2009. Web.

Gosse, Philip. The History of Piracy. New York: Dover Publications. 2007. Print.

Kraska, James and Brian Wilson. “Maritime Piracy in East Africa.” Journal of International Affairs 6(2009): 25-45.Print.

Middleton, Roger, “Piracy in Somalia: threatening global trade, feeding local wars”. 2008. Web.

Ploch, Lauren, et al. Piracy off the Horn of Africa. Congressional Report, April 27, 2011: 1-47. Print.

Randall, Kenneth C. Universal Jurisdiction under International Law, 66 Tex. L. Rev. 785, 793 (1988).

UAE. “United Arab Emirates Ministry of Foreign Affairs high level Counter-Piracy Conference 18-19 April, 201”. Web.

United Nations. “UN Security Council Resolutions”. 2008. Web.

Executive Summary

The United Nations (UN) is among key international organisations that have been clamouring for change for decades now. The calls for change have been initiated by the need to transform the organisation into a more responsive entity, with up-to-date solutions for the problems faced by its member countries in the 21^st century.

In the past the UN has been at the centre of accusations that it does not meet its core mandate, and this according to analysts featured in this report is termed as the core reason why a former Secretary General challenged member nations to adopt reforms.

While it is apparent that all member countries agree that the UN was and still is in need of reforms, the lack of consensus beyond the initial reform stages has led to a drag on the intended changes.

To date, drastic changes have only been witnessed through the dismantling of the UN commission on Human Rights and its replacement with a better, more responsive Human Rights Council. Attempts to institute changes in the organisation’s Security Council and the General Assembly are either dragging on or partially complete as is the case with reforms in the General Assembly.

Introduction

The UN has been accused for years on end of being unresponsive to the needs posed by its member countries. In 2005, the then secretary general clearly concerned about the mounting accusation drafted some proposals, which he argued if adopted could change the way the organisation handled challenges within its mandate. Before the proposed changes, the UN was accused of too much talk, without much action (Srulevitch, 2005).

But what exactly is UN’s mandate? Well, the organisation which was founded in 1945 has a responsibility to ensure that peace and stability is maintained among its 191 member countries. The UN is also mandated with fighting disease and poverty, address environmental issues, rebuild countries which have been hurt by natural or man-made causes, protect refuges and stabilise shaky international financial markets (Kresse, 2001).

The main flaws with the United Nations are the lack of support from countries that have both the financial and military capacity to do so. As a result, the organisation watched as Rwanda went to war in 1994. In 1997, despite help foster an agreement between the US and Iraq, the former went ahead and broke the agreement leading to the war in Iraq. According to Kresse (2001), this happened because the UN lacked the ability to punish member countries which violate rules set by the UN.

In 2005, the then UN secretary General Kofi Annan authored a report dubbed, “In Larger Freedom: towards development, security, and Human Rights for all” in which he wrote down the changes that needed to be adopted by the UN if it were to become effective in meeting its mandate internationally.

To Annan, strengthening the UN was among the key changes that member countries needed to institute immediately. Of notable interest, the secretary general admitted that the organisation could not comprehensively challenges and circumstances of the 21^st century using outdated techniques and approaches.

If member countries were to agree to Annan’s proposals, the UN’s General Assembly would establish mechanisms that would enable it to speed up deliberation on different issues, streamline the different agendas before it and engage more systemically with the civil society.

The Security Council on the other hand would enjoy more financial and military support from member countries, especially those in the developed world who had the capacity to make such contributions. The report further proposed changes to the Economic & Social Council, that if put in place would enable the council to play a more vibrant role in the development agenda in UN member countries.

Annan also proposed the replacement of UN’s commission on Human Rights with a smaller Human Rights Council. He argued that the former suffered from declining professionalism and credibility issues. In the proposals, the UN secretariat would also undergo changes meant to realign the decision making organ in order to meet current decision-making needs presented by member countries, while strengthening its autonomy and authority.

Assessing the Approach of Change in the U.N.

For organisational change to occur, GOSW (2007), notes that there must be a clamour for the same. This must then be acknowledged by the leaders in the organisation, who need to make decision on how best the change can be attained. The UN seems to have met this specification because after a clamour by member countries about the organisation’s inefficiencies, the secretary General finally yielded in 2003 by championing for change.

Addressing head of governments in 2003, Freiesleben (2008) notes that Annan addressed heads of governments categorically stating that, “I respectfully suggest to you, Excellencies, that in the eyes of your people the difficulty of reaching an agreement does not excuse your failure to do so….If you want the [security] Council’s decisions to command greater respect, particularly in the developing world, you need to address the issue of its composition with greater urgency” (p. 5).

Under the directive of Annan, the organisation in 2004 appointed a panel that was mandated to analyze and assess the threats in people and suggest how the Security Council could be reformed to meet the identified threats. A year later, the panel came up with a report that suggested 101 changes in the Security Council organ of the UN (Freiesleden, 2008).

Member countries had to choose between two proposed plans, with Model A, recommending letting six more members to have permanent seats in the UN. The six would also be given Veto power in addition to having elected seats which could be held for three-two year terms in elected posts.

Model B on the other hand proposed eight new seats to the Council, which could be renewed in four years, in addition to a one new seat lasting two years. The former was non-renewable. As one would expect, member countries were divided with some preferring Model A, while others favoured Model B.

After long deliberations and voting, Model B carried the day and was the most preferred by most countries. However membership issues dog the reform agenda to date and no compromise on which countries should be in the council remain a question that is yet to be resolved (Freiesleben, 2008).

According to McKinsey Quarterly (2010), successful change requires leaders and the led to be equally engaged in the change process. More to this, the people involved must be convinced that change is necessary for the organisation’s future well-being. In the UN’s member countries agreed that reforming the Security Council was absolutely necessary. However, they lacked consensus on how to go about reforming the same.

This is explained by the endless talks that have dogged the organisation since the official commencement of the reform agenda in 2003 to date. To date, the US, the UK, Russia, France and China are the only five permanent members of the Security Council. Since other countries do not feel sufficiently represented, the legitimacy of the Council is still under question suggesting that the clamour for a more-involving representation will continue.

Changes in the General Assembly

Having established that the change process on the Security Council has stalled, this report looks at the UN general assembly and the changes therein.

First, it’s noteworthy that the reform agenda in the assembly has been ongoing for more than 17 years in a body that is mandated to handle human-rights issues, health crises, environment, education, disarmament, development and terrorism in the international arena (Swart, 2008).

Unlike the Security Council, the General Assembly allows all members countries to contribute to debates brought up in meetings. Some of the changes that Kofi Annan suggested for the Assembly included faster decision-making and adoption of mechanisms that would ensure that the resolutions reached in the General Assembly’s meetings were implemented (Swart, 2008).

Over the years, the GA has been able to streamline and rationalize its agenda. According to Swart (2008), the GA used different elimination methods to shorten its agenda in order to tackle priority areas for the member countries. Initially, the GA had more than 300 agenda items.

In 2008, the GA’s agenda list had 167 items only. To ensure that no single agenda item is dismissed without being given a hearing, the GA agreed that the less important agendas would be relegated to the committees, which would address the concerns raised by the member countries.

The GA also changed its documentation processes in order to reduce the heavy volumes of reports generated by the body. To start with, it requested the Secretary-general to use annexes, tables, information or oral correspondence to while responding to information requests and only issue formal reports when it was completely necessary to do so.

Other changes in the GA includes improved proceedings whereby promptness, following rules and voting rules must be adhered to by the members; issuance of detailed reports to member states by the Secretary General; and improved coordination between committees. In addition, the changes had resulted in some modest progress, which made the GA more efficient and effective (Swart, 2009).

Changes in the secretariat

According to Martinetti (2008), Kofi Annan also pushed for institutional and management changes in the UN’s secretariat in 2005. Having been at the helm of the UN for two terms, the secretary General was well aware of the shortcomings of a semi-autonomous, inflexible and insufficiently funded secretariat.

To enhance its performance, Annan had proposed that the organisation be allowed more authority, financial support and flexibility to enhance its performance. While all member countries agreed that the UN secretariat needed changing, few agreed on the way the reforms would take place. Martinetti (2008), notes that just like was the case in reforming the Security Council; changes in the Secretariat were dogged by mistrust between the developed nations and the developing nations.

While developed countries did not want to wield too much decision-making power to the secretariat, the developing countries were more cautious about giving the developed countries more influence in the organisation.

Since developed countries contribute 80 percent of the secretariat budget, their reform agenda is pegged more on the need to change the secretariat’s spending habits in order to reduce costs. Developing nations however feel that the regular budget given to the United Nations needs to be increased in order to enable the organisation enhanced capacity to carry out its programs.

The changes proposed in the UN secretariat include a review of the secretariat’s management, the human resources where it was established that employees needed to work under streamlined contracts and harmonized working conditions, it was also established that the secretariat needed to establish an ethics office and a governance and oversight system. In addition, the secretariat needed to have improvement information technology (IT) infrastructure and its procurement procedures needed to be reformed.

Establishing the Human Rights Council

The scrapping off of the Commission on Human Rights and replacing it with a Human Rights Council was the only proposal by Kofi Annan that was received with gusto from all member states. So hasty was the decision to implement this proposal that Yeboah (2008) notes that negotiators abolished the commission without first negotiating the components of the proposed Council.

Though some member countries later agreed that the hasty decision-making led to a half-baked council, most agree the new organ was an improvement of the Human Rights Commission.

How were Stakeholders Dealt with?

According to Kane (2005), change management in any organisation is a people issue (p.21). This means that for any meaningful change to occur, the person in the leadership position must be able to motivate people under him and consequently influence their behaviour. This would in turn allow him to break old attitudes and habits hence creating an environment where new reforms can be embraced.

In an organisation as big as the UN, the then secretary General, Kofi Annan seems to have understood that organisational leaders have a key role to play in driving change. As Kane (2005) observes, any leader intent on driving change in an organisation must be willing to face these four steps namely: “signalling change, enlisting constituents, aligning the organisation and facing resistance” (p. 22).

Analysing how Annan handled the reform agenda in the gigantic organisation, it notable that he tried engaging stakeholders (read UN member countries) from an early stage. Having been convinced that the UN would become a defunct body if it did not change with the times, Annan took the UN meeting in 2005 to challenge the old way of doing things in the organisation and staged an appeal for change that resonated with the member countries.

According to Lynch (2005), Annan engaged the member countries by telling them that, “These are reforms that are within reach if we act boldly… and if we act together… we can make people everywhere more secure, more prosperous, and better able to enjoy their fundamental rights” (p. A01).

As one would imagine, implementing change in the UN is among some of the most challenging responsibilities that one can be given. Unlike smaller profit-making organisation, the planning, management and decision-making is more complex because every member country feels they have a right to contribute to the decision making.

This makes the third step as identified by Kane (2005) more challenging since aligning the organisation made up of independent members is a tough thing to do especially if each is fighting for a position that will serve their interests well. This would have been different if the member states agreed and Annan was instead working with the UN staff to institute changes agreed upon by the member states.

Recommendations

As its stands, the UN member states knows exactly the reforms that needs to take place in order to make the international organisation better in handling challenges and issues that fall within its jurisdiction within the member countries.

However, the lack of consensus on the ideal way to implementing the identified changes remain a stumbling block to the majority of the proposed changes. The only successful change that was instituted fast was changing the Commission on Human Rights to the Human Rights. This was a perfect case of how consensuses among the UN member countries enhance the reform agenda.

There is no doubt that being a complex organisation, any changes in the UN can only be brought about by consensus-building by the member states. As such, member countries who would like to see change should mobilise others in order to garner the necessary numbers needed to push change in the organisation. It is almost obvious that without consensus among member countries about issues like the Security Council, no much change will ever be attained regardless of the UN leaders push for the same.

Conclusion

The UN is no doubt a different organisation from other organisations. It is more complex, and its decision-making capabilities more tied to the will of the member nations. This is unlike other less complex organisation where change can be inspired by the leaders and passed down the leadership echelons, to the stakeholders and the employees with relative ease.

As Kane (2005) contends, change agents in smaller and less complex organisation can choose individuals to champion the concept of change. In the United Nations however, individuals are less likely to attain any meaningful progress. Committees formed among the member would on the other hand be more successful in paving new ways through which change can be brought about in the organisation.

References

Freiesleben, J. (2008) Reform of the Security Council. (eds). In Managing Change in the United Nations. New York, Centre for UN reform Education.

Government Office for the Southwest (GOSW). (2004) Managing change. Web.

Kane, K. (2005) Creating the Climate for Change: Mobilizing the executive Team and Your Organisation. In: (eds) Managing Change to reduce resistance. Harvard, Harvard Business Press.

Lynch, C. (2005) Annan Drafts Changes for U.N.: Use of force, terrorism among issues targeted. Washington Post, Monday March 19 2008, p. A01.

Martinetti, I. (2008) Secretariat and management reform. In: (eds) Managing Change in the United Nations. New York, Centre for UN reform Education.

McKinsey Quarterly. (2010) Creating organisational transformations: Mckinsey Global Survey Results. Web.

Srulevitch, A. (2005) In Larger Freedom: Kofi Annan’s Reform proposal. Web. Conference of Presidents of major American Jewish organisations. Web.

Swart, L. (2008) Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly. In: (eds) Managing Change in the United Nations. New York, Centre for UN reform Education.

Yeboah, N. (2008) The establishment of the Human Rights Council. In: (eds) Managing Change in the United Nations. New York, Centre for UN reform Education.

Introduction

The following essay is concerned with the international relations that exist between various countries in the world. The essay examines as to whether or not the founding of the United Nations represent a radical departure from the system of international law and/or international society prior to 1945.However,it is important to determine the foundation of international law.

International law which is sometimes known as public international law refers to the law that is concerned withy regulating relations between countries. Human beings are social animals implying that they becomes civilizes as time passes by. During the past, human beings were not guided by any laws.

However, the civilization of mankind enabled man to come up withy principles that will be followed in order to ensure that there is order in the society.

The origin of international law can be traced back in the 6^th Century BC when a North African ethnic group and the Carthaginians interacted by trading gold and other valuable commodities. The two communities exchanged commodities by being honest to each other and thus avoiding conflicts.

Interaction between states also occurred in ancient Eurasia whereby three independent states i.e. Mesopotamia, Nothern Island and the classical Greece shared a common regulatory system. There was cultural unity among the above three states and this facilitated the emergence of various standard practices of international law.

Studies by Emmerich de Vattel (1714-1767 ) and Hugo and Emmer(1583-1645 ) showed that the emergence of international law systems can be founded on the balance of power theory which is based on the principle that, states tend to join one another in order to restrain a state that is deemed to have gained excess power.

The United Nations emerged in 1945 with an aim of coordinating the states’ actions and to address the global issues such as peace and security. Before this period, there were devastating wars whereby many people lost their lives and thus the United Nations helped to turn around the situation (Collin & Collin, 2009, 102).

Founding of the UN

The Second World War ended in 1945 and all the citizens across the globe regretted the consequences of the war. They thus agreed that there should never be another war in the future as many people died during the war.

The US led other states such as the UK and the Soviet Union in an effort to unite all nations and to enhance peace across the globe and thus the UN was established as a result.Currently, the UN is an organization that is comprised of sovereign states and its headquarters are based in New York.

The role of the UN

The United Nations have been in existence for more than 50 years and its central function has been to maintain peace across the globe. The United Nations has played an important role of resolving disputes between the states, reducing tensions, preventing conflicts and also helping to end devastating wars.

Founding of the UN represent a radical departure of international law

The founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the international law. Before 1945, there existed a web of treaty and customary law that controlled the use of force. The United Nations charter ushered in a new era, and this made the international law prior to 1945 to be irrelevant. It is through the international law that the United Nations charter came into being.

Prior to 1945, the use of force was regulated by the principle of Just War. Studies by Grotious and St.Augustine established that, the Just War doctrine was based on the principle that it was illegal to undertake war unless there is a just cause. A just cause in this case referred to various circumstances such as right that is illegally denied or wrong done. Any war that was outside the above circumstances was deemed as illegal.

In the early 18^th century, the emergence of nation state across Europe helped to change the direction of Just War doctrine.Firstly, the doctrine of Just War was refined in order to allow a state to conduct war if there is a Just Cause.Thus, there wasn’t any legal test that was objective in determining the right of a state to use force. By the mid eighteenth century, the sovereign right of resorting to war was adopted as the governing principle.

Every country was thus vested with the right of resorting to war irrespective of any reason. The international law played an important role of regulating the use of force even though it refrained from interfering with the right of state to pursue a war (Dixon,2007,310).

Despite these, the international law prior to 1945 did little in an effort to regulate states from using excessive force and hence the founding of the United nations. The United Nations imposed a comprehensive ban with regards to the use of force by the states which did not exist prior to 1945(Dixon, 2007, 310).

The use of force by states has been in existence since time memorial. For instance, human beings used violent means so as to persuade others to act in a certain way. As the states began to organize themselves politically, the use of force became the main form of interaction.

The international law did little to help curb the use of force by the states and thus, the forming of the United Nations in 1945 helped to address the situation. The United Nations acts so as to avoid the emergence of another world war. Since the forming of the United Nations, states have abandoned the use of force and another world war has not been experienced so far since the Second World War.

Before the founding of the United Nations, states were thought to have pre-emption rights in case of necessity and thus left no moments of deliberations.However, the adoption of the United Nations Charter allowed countries to act only in self defence.

This implies that the states cannot attack one another unless the United Nations security council authorizes such action and hence the founding of the UN was a radical departure of international law (International Law Commission, 2000, 39).

The founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the International law prior to 1945.The international law prior to 1945 did not have procedural normativity.usually; states found the process of forming a custom to be hectic as there were no clear guidelines on how to go about it.

On the other hand, the United Nations charter usually shares a constitutionally quality and the substantive laws depend mainly on the procedural rules. The United Nations charter is usually a normative constitution implying that it describes the political status of international community the way it should be.

The normative constitution of the United Nations charter has the role of governing the power conditions. Prior to 1945,constotutio was primarily understood in Aristotelian point of view i.e. as a means of concreting the life condtion.This founding of the United Nations changed this notion and thus the founding of the UN was a radical departure of the international law prior to 1945 (Sarooshi & Fitzmaurice, 2004,87).

The international law prior to this period was unwritten implying that, it was too slow to be practiced and hence the United Nations was formed so as to enhance the judicial processes.

Thus the international law required that the judges be familiar with international law of states and so an offence which is committed outside a country, required much time.Judges also experienced vagueness and imprecision problems as a result of the unwritten laws. The international law prior to 1945 also did not present some clarifications.

On the other hand, the United Nations assists member states in articulating the behaviors and norms which are written. The United Nations works in various ways so as to develop and promote laws around the sustainable development issues. The United Nations sponsors scientific research as well as publishing information that is critical to the development of policy.

The United Nations also sponsors a number of conferences in an effort to develop policies. In addition, the United Nations offers the member states training, work plans and consulting services. This thus has seen a radical departure of the international law prior to 1945 (Collin & Collin, 2009, 102).

The international law prior to 1945 was based on the general practice among states and so, it was almost impossible to analyze the practice of all the states across the globe and hence the emergence of the United Nations. The international law prior to 1945 limited the sovereignty of states as it required the states to create customs.

It required all the states to have adequate knowledge concerning the practice states and this was indeed impossible.However, the founding of the United Nations enabled most states to participate in global issues.

Also, the founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the international law prior to 1945 because it enhanced the sovereignty of nations because it provides a forum whereby, both the developed and the developing nations can interact effectively.

The founding of the United Nations General Assembly enhanced formal equality in that less powerful countries can express their views in an effective manner( Bederman, 2002,116).

The founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the international law prior to 1945 because it acts to prevent the crimes against humanity. At present, the United Nations functions to prevent and suppress mass killings. The United |Nations also responds militarily in many conflict situations particularly in a cases where the civilians are disproportionately victimized.

For instance, the Un has deployed more than forty peace-keeping missions in an effort to help end wars in such countries as Mozambique and El Salvador.Whereas,the United Nations humanitarian intervention aim is to protect a state’s citizens abroad, the interventions however helps in rescuing the citizens of target countries from suffering.

On the other hand, the international law prior to 1945 did not recognize the need for human intervention and thus the founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the international law prior to 1945.

Conclusion

The founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the International law prior to 1945. The international law prior to 1945 did little in an effort to regulate states from using excessive force and therefore, the founding of the United Nations came to abandon states from using force against one another unjustifiably.

The international law prior to 1945 also The founding of did not have procedural normativity and so there were no clear guidelines on how to handle global issues.

Also,the international law prior to 1945 was based on the general practice among states and so, it was almost impossible to analyze the practice of all the states across the globe and so, the founding of the United Nations was a radical departure of the International law prior to 1945.

In addition, the founding of the United nations was a radical departure of the international law prior to 1945 because it acts to prevent the crimes against humanity.

Reference List

Bederman, D.J., 2002.The spirit of international law.Georgia: University of Georgia Press.

Collin, R. M. & Collin, R. W., 2009. Encyclopedia of Sustainability, Volume 1. California: ABC-CLIO.

Dixon, M., 2007.Textbook on international law.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

International Law Commission. 2000. Yearbook of the International Law Commission. New York: United Nations Publications.

Sarooshi, D & Fitzmaurice, M., 2004. Issues of state responsibility before International judicial institutions. London: Hart Publishing.

Introduction

The United Nations (UN) is a worldwide institute who’s affirmed objectives are assisting collaboration in intercontinental law, global security, economic progress, societal development, individual liberties and attainment of global harmony. The body was set up in 1745 following the Second World War to substitute the League of Nations, to bring to a halt conflicts involving nations, and to offer a stage for discussion.

It entails several auxiliary bodies to put through its undertakings. There are presently 192 affiliate nations, with each autonomous country in the world other than the Vatican City (United Nations Cyberschoolbus Country at a Glance).

From its administrative centers around the world, the UN and its specific outfits settle on essential and organizational matters in normal conventions held right through the year. The body has six major organs and the Security Council is the organ tasked with fixing on given decisions for harmony and safety.

The UN has carried out several peaces restoration and observance missions in Africa since the 1950s to the present day. Following independence, several African nations have been involved in civil unrest and the UN has been the international body mostly involved in exercises to ensure warring factions stay in peace.

The progression from an armed clash to peace and tranquility is usually divided into four different exercises. These exercises are; conciliation, peacekeeping, peace implementation and peace building, in that order. The conciliation exercise is normally a diplomatic undertaking while the rest are enforced by armed forces (Anyidoho, 13).

United Nations peace exercises have been positive and gainful alternatives for dealing with some conflicts and humanitarian predicaments.

The greater part of the 35 mediation exercises carried out by the UN over the past five decades have been of great significance in ending regional conflicts, enhancing social equality, and keeping an eye on human rights. They have assisted stop expatriate flows and resulted in stability to areas of strategic and economic significance.

Organisation des Nations Unies au Congo

Organisation des Nations Unies au Congo, truncated to ONUC, translates to The United Nations Organization in the Congo in English. This was a UN international relations military unit in Congo that was instituted following the United Nations Security Council Resolution 143 of July 14, 1963. From this period the name was changed to Opération des Nations Unies au Congo (Washington CRS Report for Congress 2001, 12).

Congo got independence on June 30 1960. However, the Belgian commander-in-chief declined to Africanize the administrators’ units of the armed forces. As a result of the there was disarray and uprisings broke out.

As the then head of state and the prime minister were engrossed in finding a middle ground with the radicals, the Belgian administration made a decision to get involved to safeguard Belgians that were still in the country. The Belgian administration was for the idea that Katanga Province, one of the most productive in the country be independent. This is where the majority of the Belgians stayed.

The Belgian administration sent its soldiers to Elisabethville, Katanga’s headquarters to safeguard Belgians on July 10, 1960. They claimed autonomy of the region. Two days later, Congo’s President and the Prime Minister requested for aid of the UN in resolving the matter (Anon).

The UN Secretary-General asked the concerned organ, the UN Security Council, to act on the issue as a matter of urgency in a meeting held on July 13th, 1960. The Security Council required the Belgian administration to take put its soldiers from Congo’s land.

The decision allowed the UN Secretary General to go ahead, in discussion with the Congolese administration, to offer that regime with the required forces aid until it felt that, by way of its labors with the technological help of the UN, the countrywide defense forces were in a position to achieve their responsibilities completely.

After the Security Council actions, the United Nations Force in the Congo (MONUC) was instituted. To perform these duties, the Secretary General put together a UN Force, which at its climax force added up to 20,000. The military unit was in Congo from 1960 to 1964, and remained a mediation force, not a war machine.

They could only use their weaponry in self defense. Nevertheless, they in due course became aggressively occupied in repressing the attempted secession of Katanga. The pulling out of Belgian soldiers was accomplished by September of the same year.

Following this, Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba went ahead in an effort to invade Katanga on his own, looking up to the Soviet Union for assistance. The raid effort never got to Katanga and resulted in discord within the Central Administration, the fall down of that administration and in the end to Patrice Lumumba’s apprehension in December.

The United Nations soldiers remained in the country until 1964 and during all this time they were assisting the administration to uphold tranquility and in strengthening the autonomy of the nation. After all this, Katanga remained a province.

United Nations Operations in Mozambique

The United Nations operations in Mozambique in the early 90s are abbreviated ONUMOZ. The operations were instituted in December of 1992 to help in the enactment of the harmony accord involving the administration of Mozambique and the opposition faction RENAMO.

The nation’s post-independence civil strife took place from 1976 to 1992 and led to the death of approximately 1 million people (Handicap International). It also led to the devastation of the nation’s infrastructure and farming capability, and forced millions of immigrants into next-door nations.

Mozambique’s Portuguese colonial cream of the crop departed right away after independence. After a few years, the country, like a number of other African nations, got caught up in the area disorder fired by Cold War enmities and the procedures of the Apartheid administration in neighboring South Africa. Just about two decades of civil conflict at last ended in 1992.

The fall down of white administrations all through southern Africa, the coming to an end of the Cold War, and a destructive food crisis, offered the setting for the General Peace Agreement marked between the war factions in Rome.

ONUMOZ kept an eye on the truce and disbandment of armed groups and offered safety for humanitarian aid. The being there of ONUMOZ shored up safety and assurance as the conditions of the tranquility agreements were enacted and free polls conducted.

Countrywide polls, conducted in October 1994, were confirmed to be free and fair by the United Nations. Up to 90% of entitled voters took part in the exercise and both competing sides honored the outcome of the poll.

The command of ONUMOZ came to an end with the putting in place of the freshly voted national administration in December 1994. All the United Nations troops were pulled out as of January 31, the following year.

In this country, the United Nations did well in disbanding armed foes exhibiting great hostility and animosity, getting immigrants back home, and building an atmosphere within which free and fair polls could be conducted (United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs).

In this, it ensured better stableness all through the southern African expanse, serving as a case in point for continuing United Nations efforts to put an end to Angola’s lengthy civil strife.

United Nations Peace-building Support Office in Liberia

This is abbreviated UNOL and as instituted in November 1997 after the conclusion of UNOMIL’s command at the end of September of the same year. UNOMIL was the United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia that had been running since 1993.

UNOL was led by an envoy of the Secretary General and was basically the first UN post-war maintenance organization whose task was to principally help the administration strengthen harmony after the July 1997 multiparty polls.

Civil conflict in Liberia took away more than 250,000 lives and resulted in a full collapse of law and order (The United Nations Statistics Division). A lot of civilians were displaced, both inland and beyond the nation’s borders.

There were about 850,000 expatriates in the next-door nations. Warfare commenced towards the end of 1989, and by the beginning of 1990, quite a lot of hundred deaths had taken place in conflicts involving government troops and opposition rebels of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia, NPFL. NPFL was led by a previous government officer, Mr. Charles Taylor.

As of the beginning of the war, a sub regional association, the Economic Community of West African States, embarked on a number of ideas directed at a diplomatic agreement. The UN shored up ECOWAS in its labors. Some of the help that UN offered was instituting of an ECOWAS observer unit, enforcing an arms restriction on Liberia and providing a Special Envoy to help in negotiations involving ECOWAS and the groups in conflict.

Following ECOWAS’s negotiation of a peace accord in Benin in 1993, the UN Security Council instituted UNOMIL. UNOMIL was tasked with shoring up the enactment of the Benin peace accord, particularly falling in line with and unbiased enactment of the accord by all parties.

UNOMIL became the initial UN international relations exercise carried out in collaboration with a peacekeeping exercise previously instituted by another association.

Holdups in the enactment of the tranquility accord and restarted warfare among Liberian splinter groups made it unworkable to conduct polls in early 1994, as pre-arranged. In the upcoming months, some complimentary tranquility accords, adjusting and shedding light on the Benin accord was bargained (Johnson).

With the truce in effect, the UN effectively monitored the July 1997 polls. Mr. Charles Taylor emerged as the winner. He was sworn in and instituted a new administration and declared a course of action of ceasefire and national harmony. UNOMIL’s main aim was attained.

UNOL came in after UNOMIL and by way of complete back up by the Security Council, it made possible the endorsement of national ceasefire and first-rate administration and assisted in drumming up global back up for the enactment of restoration and growth agendas.

In the most up to date stage, UNOL directed its efforts toward accomplishment of the stipulations of a reworked consent, permitted by the Security Council on April 23, 2003.

Under the stipulations of that reworked consent, and to add to its original duties, UNOL was to lay emphasis on helping the administration of Liberia in tackling its articulated facility requirements in the areas of civil rights and the carry-out of polls, as well as on building up a peace building tactic putting together opinionated intentions, agenda aid and civil rights contemplations.

Nonetheless, the peace building labors of UNOL were badly deterred by the lack of ability of the administration and opposition party leading lights to settle their discrepancies over major issues of administration.

In the meantime, the endorsement of national squaring off was chip away at by organized maltreatment of civil liberties, the omission persecution of political rivals and lack of security sector reorganization and improvement.

These factors had a major role to play to the recommencement of civil strife in Liberia, propelling the international community to call on the fighting factions to go after a bargained resolution of the disagreement (Human Rights Watch Africa).

On July 8, 2003, the UN Secretary General assigned Jacques Paul Klein of the US as his Special Envoy to Liberia. This was a period in which the war involving Government troops and the various militaristic groups stepped up and the humanitarian catastrophe in danger.

Jacques was tasked with organizing the actions of the United Nations organs in Liberia and shoring up the up-and-coming changeover preparations. On July 29 of the same year the UN Secretary General charted a three-pronged set out of intercontinental forces to Liberia, directing to a multifaceted mediation exercise.

He also stated that, with the selection of Mr. Jacques, and the foreseen institution of a United Nations exercise in Liberia, the command of UNOL would of course have to be concluded.

Works Cited

Anon 2004. “Can Africans keep their own peace?” Web.

Anon 2004 Strategic Comments. “African peacekeeping: Revival or relapse?” 2004 (5 Strategic Comments. Anyidoho. “Political Control and Guidance of Peace Support Operations in Africa: A UN Commander’s View” (2002). Ghana Armed Forces. p. 13

Grey-Johnson. “Beyond Peacekeeing; The Challenge of Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Peacebuilding in Africa” (2006) (1) UN Chronicle Online Edition. Web.

Handicap International, 2010. Web.

Human Rights Watch Africa, 2009. Web.

The United Nations Statistics Division. “World Statistics Pocketbook and Statistical Yearbook, 2008.” Web.

United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs, Landmine Clearance Unit Report on Mozambique. 2003. Web.

United Nations Cyberschoolbus Country at a Glance. 2008. Web.

Washington CRS Report for Congress 2001. “Copson RW Democratic Republic of the Congo: Peace Process and Background.” (2001). p. 12.

Introduction

The United Nations (U.N.) was born on June 26, 1945 after fifty nations from around the world including the U.S., U.K., USSR, France and China signed the Charter of the United Nations in San Francisco.

Official ratification by the five states which were also permanent members of the U.N. Security Council occurred on the 24^th of October, 1945 and this marked the official formation of the U.N. The League of Nations which had previously held the mantle of ‘world peacekeeper’ subsequently dissolved itself to pave way for the newly created body.

From the UN Charter, we draw conclusions that the intention of the founder members of the U.N. was to form a body that could effectively address all global issues related to peace and security.

However, from 1945 to date, the world has never been completely at peace with all manner of strife and conflict beginning from the cold war to the current Middle East versus the West conflict. New threats such as terrorism and civil strife keep the U.N. occupied and sometimes overwhelmed such that some conflicts have received less attention than they deserved.

The UN Charter mandates the Security Council to be the sole decision making body on all matters concerning peace and security around the world. Article 24 of the Charter states that the signatories grant the Security Council power to act on their behalf on all matters regarding global peace and security.

It further mandates the council to act within the U.N.’s powers and principles and to submit annual reports to the U.N. General Assembly on the progress made in terms of its mandate.

The Council, according to Article 24 should consist of fifteen members, five of which are the veto-wielding countries- France, UK, US, USSR and the People’s Republic of China. The other ten non-permanent members are to be elected by the General Assembly for a term of two years (Norman 2005, 6).

The Charter in Article 39 envisages that “the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of peace, or act of aggression… and shall decide what measures shall be taken….(UN Charter)”.

Article 42 then gives the council the green light to “… take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and operations by land, sea, or air forces of Members of the United Nations.”

In addition to the Security Council, the U.N., with the aid of ‘specialized agencies’ such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has come up with several pieces of legislation in the form of conventions that deal with particular threats to international peace and security such as terrorism and nuclear proliferation.

These treaties are twelve in number and they all relate to acts that aid or are closely connected to terrorism. Interestingly, all the above protocols and conventions were completed before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. (Norman 2005, 5).

The Security Council, together with these U.N. bodies and affiliates together form the U.N.‘ collective’ security system. The emphasis on collectiveness is based on the fact that all member states are expected to participate in the security apparatus.

Despite, the collective security and the provisions of the UN Charter, the reaction of the U.N. to transnational threats has been lukewarm at best. The U.N. seems to be plagued by numerous problems that have prevented its ability to counter new threats such as nuclear proliferation.

Part of its weaknesses is caused by its inability to adjust to the changing global arena, which has seen a bust of globalization, centralization of trade and increased diplomatic ties between member states. In the words of Sir Robert Jackson in 1969,

The [U.N.] machine as a whole has become unmanageable in the strictest sense of the word. As a result, it is becoming slower and more unwieldy like some prehistoric monster. The lumbering dinosaur is now 40 years older and certainly not better adapted to the climate of the twenty-first century (Weiss 147).

This paper shall look into these new threats, what the U.N. is doing about them and how it should be dealing with them.

The UN’s response to Terrorism

Since the September 11 attacks, there has been an increased focus on the threat of terrorism and the access of nuclear materials to terrorist organizations and ‘rogue’ states. The body mainly responsible for much of the legislative action has been the General Assembly (G.A.) (Rosand 2003, 333).

The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) which runs the U.N.’s social and economic policy has taken the mantle from the assembly and has played a key role in counter-terrorism.

The U.N.’s Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (UNCCPCJ) has also played a key role in forming the ‘U.N. system’ (Norman 2005, 7). Together, the three have helped formulated multilateral legislation to counter terrorism. Though the G.A. cannot compel members into action, the recommendations made are influential in the shaping of national and regional counter-terrorism policy.

The 40-member UNCCPCJ and the 400-member U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) have been credited with their action against transnational crime such as trafficking of persons and drugs, corruption, organized crime and terrorism (UNODC 2004, 4). The UNODC has a special Terrorism Prevention Branch which has helped coordinate state efforts in counter-terrorism through the Global Programme against Terrorism.

Through the above system, the U.N. has worked to provide both peaceful and coercive solutions to the threat posed by terrorism. While the Security Council responded aptly to the September 11 attacks condemning them as a threat to global peace and security, the response was not targeted to the particular act of terrorism but to international terrorism as a whole (Norman 2005, 4).

Though the immediate remedial action was targeted at Osama Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda terrorist network, the overall action in setting up bodies and legislation was aimed at achieving a multifaceted counter-terrorism framework (NACTAUS 2004, 9).

Additionally, the U.N.’s response provided universal legal norms that guided both regional and local legislation and policy on terrorism and related acts. The pillar of these norms is contained in Article 33 of the UN Charter which states that in dealing with a threat whose remedy can be achieved through peaceful and coercive means, peaceful means must be considered first.

This strategy informed the U.N.’s response to the 2001 attacks and led to the development of the policy of ‘dissuasion’, ‘denial of means to act’ and ‘sustainable cooperation’ as the three main counter-terrorism tools (PWG 2002, Para. 21). However, the above three-pronged approach is just but one out of a myriad of strategies that the U.N. has adopted.

In the 1990s period, counter-terrorism strategy adopted by the U.N. through concerted effort was at most punitive and severe since it involved wide economic and diplomatic sanctions against terrorist-supporting states. A good example of this is the U.N.’s response to Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya after the government prevented the prosecution of Libyans involved in the 1993 Lockerbie bombing.

Another such example was the placement of sanctions against the Sudanese government for its alleged support of Bin Laden and his network of terrorists.

Perhaps the most stringent response by the U.N. to terrorism was the invoking of sanctions against the Afghan Taliban regime through Resolution 1267 (popularly known as SCR 1267) which involved the formation of a special “sanctions committee” to oversee the compliance of states to the sanctions.

Placing of sanctions is done in accordance to Chapter VII of the UN Charter which provides that action shall be taken “with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression”.

Interestingly, four days after SCR 1267 was passed, the twelfth convention on counter-terrorism (Convention on the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism) was passed. This marked a change in U.N. policy since the focus now was the speedy adoption of these protocols and conventions with an aim to cause a universal legal framework to prevent both domestic and international terrorism.

In light of all these efforts from various organs of the U.N. towards a legal counter-terrorism framework, only Botswana and the U.K. had effectively acceded to the twelve conventions by September of 2001 (Ward 2003, 289). In particular, only two other countries; Uzbekistan and Sri Lanka had passed the 1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.

This lukewarm reaction by the international community coupled with the shock that came with the 2001 attacks led the Security Council to blame non-ratification as the cause of the proliferation of the terrorism threat (Szasz 2002, 901).

The mobilization of state actors to cooperate in fighting terrorism was cited to be the main U.N. strategy to defeat the vice. The Security Council consequently developed a two-pronged strategy that involved increasing state capacity to implement counter-terrorism measures and the monitoring of state compliance with universally accepted legal norms.

Resolution 1373 placed focus on this strategy and it aimed at obliging states to sign and ratify the U.N. conventions on terrorism and related acts.

It also required states to cooperate in international counter-terrorism by sharing intelligence, proper screening of seekers of asylum, addressing terrorism loopholes and links, battling organized crime, reporting on any nuclear materials found in suspicious hands and eliminating exemption clauses in extradition laws (SCR 1373, para 4).

Another major contribution of SCR 1373 was the establishment of the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC), which was annexed to the Security Council as a “committee to monitor implementation of this resolution (para 6).” The committee operated in stark contrast with the sanctions committee of Resolution 1267.

The CTC was given an open-ended mandate which indicated that the U.N. appreciated the threat posed by terrorism and thus continuous obligatory monitoring was and still is a necessity (Norman 2005, 12).

The CTC’s mandate under Resolution 1373 is threefold; first, it works to ensure that all states have legislation that supports counter-terrorism.

Secondly, it looks to strengthen existing state machinery for counter-terrorism and finally, it looks to ensure compliance with other aspects of the Resolution such as capacity building, border screening, international policing, intelligence exchange, extradition and tracing and seizure of proceeds of crime (CTC 2004, 34).

Despite, its efforts, the U.N. is still ill-equipped in its fight against terrorism. Weiss (2009) states that the global body is crippled by four individual and collective problems (146). The first of this is what he terms as the ‘Westphalian system’ whereby the narrow interests of individual states have blurred the global agenda.

Secondly, there is ‘diplomatic burlesque’ whereby states have aligned themselves in interest groups that rarely agree even on mundane matters. The first two problems affect the decision-making capacity of the U.N. The other two problems are structural in nature.

First, there is the problem of agencies with overlapping jurisdictions and lacking in centralized command and coordination. The other problem is bureaucracy and low productivity among the employees of the U.N. yet staff costs account for the largest share of the U.N. budget (146).

The UN’s response to Nuclear Proliferation

The issue of nuclear proliferation is not unrelated to that of terrorism. Nuclear proliferation began in the later part of the 1940s after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan which brought World War II to an abrupt end.

The devastating consequences of the use of nuclear weapons were laid bare for all to see and if that was not enough, the Chernobyl accident of 1986 confirmed that nuclear weapons were not the only threat; nuclear material was equally dangerous.

During the Cold War, the U.S. and Russia were in an arms race, the result of which was that they both have more than 28,000 nuclear warheads in their stockpiles which is enough to destroy the world as we know it (Cooper 2004, 301).

With time, other countries such as India, Pakistan, China, France, UK and Israel built their own stockpiles though this was mainly for defense purposes. Through the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction, states agree that they would not use nuclear weapons against each other due to the effect of retaliatory attacks.

However, the doctrine is only theoretical in the sense that ‘rogue’ states such as Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Syria have at times alluded to their intention to acquire and use nuclear weapons. In addition, terrorist organizations have also attempted to lay their hands on nuclear weapons which increase the threat of nuclear proliferation (Cooper 2004, 301).

The U.N. has established the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as its watchdog against the unlicensed proliferation of nuclear material. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was passed in 1968 and it sought to prevent the non-nuclear states from acquiring nuclear weapons while prohibiting nuclear states from increasing their stockpiles.

In addition, the hugely popular treaty provided that the nuclear states would assist non-nuclear ones in developing nuclear power for peaceful use as long as they would forgo their intentions to acquire nuclear weapons. To date, the NPT and the IAEA are the only hope against nuclear proliferation (Cooper 2004, 303).

Weaknesses of the UN in addressing terrorism

Initially, the Security Council in combating terrorism used sanctions as the preferred method as evident in Resolution 1267. However, this approach (which seemed to work better in deterrence) was watered down by SCR 1269 which substituted the hard-line stance on terrorism to a more ‘timid’ strategy (Norman 2005, 6).

However, the reason for the change in approach was to include more countries into the counter-terrorism strategy. Nevertheless, there is no special obligation placed on member states to comply with set universal legal norms and the Security Council cannot compel a state to accede to a law (Szasz 2002, 905).

Looking at the other U.N. options, it is clear that the Terrorism Prevention Branch lacks the necessary framework to fight terrorism on a wider level due to limitations in personnel and legal support. The legal deficiency was witnessed when the U.N. Office of Legal Affairs’ Action Plan for the year 2000 failed to include terrorism in its Strategy for an Era of Application of International Law.

The plan blamed the poor penetration of international law on poor follow-up by individual states. It states that “many multilateral treaties of potential global application remain unsigned by a large number of States or, though signed, unratified.

The objective of creating a global framework of binding norms in the areas concerned is consequently frustrated, particularly in those cases in which the treaties are prevented from entering into force” (UNOLA 2000, 2).

Norman (2005) states that though the U.N. is objective about state cooperation in counter-terrorism, practical capacity-building and the necessary support to ensure compliance was absent (6).

He finds that in acting against a particular threat the Security Council showed political will in diffusing it such as the Lockerbie and Sudanese incidents but in binding members to come up with a comprehensive legal framework, political will is hard to obtain (7).

The best example of the lack of consensus on these legal norms is the lack of a universal definition of terrorism. In addition, there has been no progress on the initial intention to have a single comprehensive convention on terrorism (UNGA 2000, paras.13-18). The reason behind the lack of a clear definition lies in the fact that many states are reluctant to accept definitions that might hinder them from adequately dealing with ‘political threats’.

Instead, these states have preferred to keep municipal legislation that legitimizes use of brutish force against activists and political actors (SGA 2002, paras.11-13). This has prevented the U.N. from coming up with a definition that is both acceptable and inclusive of the elements that involve terrorism.

As a summary, it is evident that the U.N. suffers from the lack of political will by member states to fully commit themselves to counter-terrorism. The reason for this has been mainly the obsession with the West, particularly America, to introduce a whole raft of changes that seek to take away the sovereignty of states in the name of counter-terrorism.

States have also been concerned with the zeal with which particular groups have been targeted in counter-terrorism, which has led to suspicion on the real intent of the fight against terrorism.

Naturally, the nations with Islam as a major religion have been majorly concerned about these endeavors, especially because terrorist purport to act in the name of Allah and so counter-terrorism measures might aim at suppressing Islam. Since the U.N. cannot compel member states to comply with legal agenda, the U.N. remains captive to political forces, thus limiting its capability to deal with the vice effectively.

Weaknesses of the UN in addressing Nuclear Proliferation

Cooper (2004) finds that the U.N. is actually very poorly equipped to handle the threat of nuclear proliferation (297). First, the NPT is an optional protocol, and being the only piece of international law seeking to prevent proliferation, the non-compliance with the treaty is to be expected.

In addition, nuclear states such as India, Israel, Pakistan, and North Korea have either refused to sign the NPT or pulled out of the convention, thus putting global peace into jeopardy. The IAEA remains the only hope for non-proliferation, but it remains ill-equipped and powerless. First, member states have to give permission to IAEA inspectors and this being voluntary; there is no way to monitor the nuclear activity of a particular state.

The only hope for non-proliferation has been the control of trade in nuclear materials, but even this has been dashed by the discovery of a thriving nuclear “black market”. Apparently, it is only possible to monitor 90% of the nuclear material produced; thus, the other 10% is at risk of being acquired by ‘rogue states’ and terrorists.

After 1991, the world learnt that Iraq had been secretly making nuclear weapons following the Gulf War and an additional protocol was added to the NPT which gave the IAEA more power to conduct investigations at weapons facilities but only 38 states have ratified it (Cooper 2004, 299).

In the words of the former Director-General Mohammed El-Baradei, there is “need for a complete overhaul of the export control system. It is not working right now (Cooper 2004, 301).”

The best examples of the U.N.’s ineffectiveness against nuclear proliferation are the cases where the U.N. has failed to stop the acquisition of nuclear material by rogue states. The most recent of these cases is the Iran case where the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government has been enriching uranium against IAEA and U.N. directives.

Another peculiar case was the confession by A.Q. Khan, the ‘father’ of the Pakistani nuclear bomb that he had been illegally peddling nuclear technology to Libya and other rogue states.

This led President Bush to state that “…these terrible weapons are becoming easier to acquire, build, hide and transport…. Our message to proliferators must be consistent and must be clear: We will find you, and we’re not going to rest until you’re stopped” (Cooper 2004, 209).

Part of the reason why it has been had to control proliferation has been the argument that allowing certain states to have nuclear weapons while preventing other access to the weapons amounts to neo-colonialism. In fact, most states feel that Western states have not taken measures to get rid of their own stockpiles and thus their monitoring of other states is in itself an attempt at dominion.

This is why the non-G8 nuclear states have refused to sign the NPT. Another reason why these states have distanced themselves from non-proliferation attempts are the unique problems of individual states. In the case of Israel, there is need to protect itself from its ‘hostile’ neighbors.

For India and Pakistan, tension between both states has made them acquire nuclear weapons. It remains to be seen what steps the international community shall take to prevent proliferation since this is a sensitive issue that might threaten peace and security.

Recommendations

Jolly et al. (2005) make various suggestions to improve the U.N. to meet new transnational security threats. They state that the current structure of the U.N. and its approach to security as a whole is flawed and needs to be reconsidered. First, they suggest that collective security should be reconsidered outside the ‘traditional compasses of national and military security (61).

Instead, a collective approach should be postured on globalization and instead of depicting terrorism and nuclear proliferation as threats to nations; they should be marketed as threats to trade and good relations which countries can easily identify with outside their political interests (62).

These researchers further suggest that the U.N. should address global inequality and unresolved political differences so as to gain the necessary consensus needed for action.

Weiss (2009) suggests that the U.N. should focus more on the concepts of global citizenship and international responsibility to eliminate the threat posed by nationalism and narrow-minded interests that are the biggest setbacks to its capability to combat terrorism and nuclear proliferation (148).

Lastly, he adds that the U.N. structure should be reformed based on performance, leadership, integrity, and talent just like any other 21^st Century body with a mind for success (151).

Conclusion

All in all, the U.N. has made various attempts to meet threats of peace and security in the globe. For particular threats, the Security Council has met and provided solutions to the problems which have in one way or the other, helped solve conflicts. However, just like any other regional or international body, the UN has been the victim of political back and forth between states.

As such, it is necessary that the U.N. adjusts itself to rid itself of these weaknesses that have stifled its effectiveness in eradicating global insecurity. This would involve reviewing legal frameworks, especially on nuclear proliferation, taking tougher stances on terrorism and fighting the politicization of the security debate.

In addition to these measures, the UN should be re-invented to reflect 21^st Century practices such as centralization of trade and command, performance-based contracting, global citizenship and less fascination with national sovereignty. This way, it can equip itself to solve 21^st Century problems.

References

CTC (2004) CTC Programme of Work. Available at: https://www.un.org/en/ .

Cooper, M.H. (2004) Nuclear Proliferation and Terrorism. The CQ Researcher, 14 (13), 297-320.

Jolly, R., Emmerij, L and Weiss, T. (2005) The Power of U.N. Ideas: Lessons from the First 60 Years. New York: United Nations Intellectual History Project.

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the U.S. (NACTAUS) (2004) Overview of the Enemy. Staff Statement No. 15. Web.

Norman, P. (2005) The United Nations and Counter-terrorism after September 11: Towards an Assessment of the Impact and Prospects of Counter-Terror ‘Spill-Over’ Into International Criminal Justice Cooperation. Portsmouth: Centre for European Studies Research, University of Portsmouth.

Policy Working Group on the United Nations and Terrorism (PWG) (2002) Report of the Policy Working Group on the United Nations and Terrorism. UN General Assembly /Security Council, A/57/273-S/2002/875. New York: United Nations.

Rosand, E. (2003) Security Council Resolution 1373, the Counter-Terrorism Committee, and the Fight against Terrorism. The American Journal of International Law, 97(2), 333-341.

Secretariat of the General Assembly (SGA) (2002) U.N. General Assembly 57th Session: Summaries of the work of the Sixth Committee. New York: U.N. General.

Szasz, P.C. (2002) The Security Council Starts Legislating. The American Journal of International Law, 96(4), 901-905.

U.N. General Assembly Sixth Committee (UNGA) (2000) Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism. Report of Sixth Committee, A/55/614.

United Nations Office of Legal Affairs (UNOLA) (2000) “Strategy for an Era of Application of International Law: Action Plan [Electronic version]”. Adopted by the Senior Management Group and Approved by the Secretary-General. New York: United Nations.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2004) Global Programme against Terrorism: Momentum for increased international action against terrorism. Vienna: UNODC.

Ward, C.A. (2003) Building Capacity to Combat International Terrorism: The Role of the United Nations Security Council. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 8(2), 289-305.

Weiss, T.G (2009) Toward a Third Generation of International Institutions: Obama’s U.N. Policy. The Washington Quarterly, 32(3), 141-162

Development of the UN is a reflection of the development of humanity. People reveal a growing interest in global cooperation and a variety of UN activities show these efforts. According to PIPA, people in many countries support the idea of UN accepting new members (“23-country poll,” 2005).

This proves the assumption that people are ready to make a mutual effort and forget about disparities so as to be able to address urgent global issues, i.e. environmental, social, economic, political, etc. Apart from expansion, the UN is undergoing certain structural changes. It is clear that there are growing concerns for peace and financial security.

The UN responds to these concerns as the UN officials claim the organization is being restructured. The UN bodies obtain wider powers and they increase cooperation with other global organizations (e.g. IMF) and governments of different countries (“General assembly president,” 2011). Admittedly, these changes will favourably affect development of the UN as well as the globalized society.

This will enable people to develop better patterns of resources distribution which, in its turn, will help address such issues as poverty, famine, etc. The organization will also be able to more effectively address issues concerning refugee flows. The reorganized UN will potentially affect governments of countries preventing them from starting military campaigns.

It is necessary to note that the positive changes within the organization are due to the activities of different UN state members. All state members contribute greatly to the development of the organization. However, it is clear that some states have greater influence. As far as I am concerned, the USA is one of the most influential state members.

This country shapes the policies of the organization to certain extent. US officials claim that this influence can be easily justified as the country’s monetary donation is considerable, i.e. “22 percent contribution to the world body’s operating budget” (Gaouetten & Varner, 2011).

Admittedly, the UN operations have been influenced by American values and national policies. However, it is also necessary to note that this influence has been positive so far. In other words, the UN aims at promulgating democratic values which are typical of the US.

Reference List

Gaouette, N. & Varner, B. (2011). Republicans to unveil bill to force major changes at the UN. Bloomberg. Web.

General assembly president calls for stronger economic and social council. (2011). UN News Centre. Web.

23-country poll finds strong support for dramatic changes at UN, and for increased UN power. (2005). Web.

The UN System

The UNO is not just an inter-governmental organization located in New York and comprising of key political organs such as the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the General Assembly and the Security Council. The UN body is made up of about 16 UN specialized agencies with independent Assemblies and Councils-including Secretariats and budgets (White 281).

These agencies deal with global issues such as: international telecommunications; merchant shipping; financial crises; and diseases. These agencies have also produced several subsidiaries bodies. For example, the UN General assembly has created several bodies such as the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to address children’s welfare and economic issues respectively (White 281).

The UN Values

The values that the UN promotes are enclosed within the Preamble of the system’s foremost treaties. Most of these core values (self-rule, human rights protection and peace) symbolized a new departure for the international community in 1945. These values are used as benchmarks for assessing the failure or success of the UNO.

They also provide goals that can be pursued by the UNO. What’s more, other values have been integrated with the core values. For example, environmental protection was added to the core values following the UN Conference on Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972 (White 288).

The swift development of agencies and mechanisms for use in alleviating further destruction of world’s environment underlined the need for entrenching environmental protection as a core value (White 288).

Apart from environmental protection, the promotion of democratic system has been entrenched as a core value (derived from self-rule principle). Nevertheless, the UN’s promotion of democratic system should not be construed to mean the triumph of liberalism over communism after Cold War ended (Fox and Roth 532).

The establishment and consistency of these principles are in harmony with the UN’s core value of protection and promotion of human rights which the organization has promoted ever since the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For example, the self-rule principle was recognized by the UN in 1945 and it has been promoted since then (White 288).

Other core values established by the UN are socio-economic comfort, justice and law, and peace and security (Falk 208). Although peace and security are pursued by the principal organs set up by the UN Charter, other values are promoted by specialized agencies as well as supplementary bodies and programmes.

Consequently, there is a general perception that peace and security is the principal value pursued while other values are deemed secondary in the pecking order (White 288).

The Nature of the Founding Law

The UN is not just an organization characterized by a convoluted structure of conference. It is a system based on law. The question that emerges then relates to the character of this law. Following the establishment of the League of Nations Covenant in1919, there have been numerous attempts to suggest the existence of a considerable distinction between constitutional multilateral agreements and normal multilateral treaties (Johnston 889).

This suggestion represented a paradigm shift from the observation that international law was, in reality, a private law between compliant states acting as equals as opposed to any type of public law. The balance in this argument can be traced back to when Max Huber asserted that the legal nature of the League of Nations Covenant was “neither contractual nor constitutional (Zimmern 290).

According to Huber, the Covenant had a dissimilar disposition from the typical contractual agreements and exchanges that had taken place before. It is worth mentioning that inter-governmental organizations-such as International telecommunications Union (ITU) founded in 1865 and the Universal Postal Union (UPU) created in 1874- existed before the League of Nations (White 290).

As a matter of fact, the treaty that created UPU was considered a constitution. The ITU and UPU established a union of services which implies that the legal framework developed by member-states of these organizations was a contractual one (Crawford 6).

The UN and Constitutionalism

If we shift from the post-1919 world order to the post-1945 order, the portrait presented above is one made up of societal values that shape, inform and regulate the functioning of an intricate set of organizations within a structure enclosed by legal instruments of foundational importance (White 291).

It is obvious that the UN structure is not only managed by a series of accords/treaties but also by a composite constitution, with the UN Charter at the centre. The UN Charter is aptly characterized by Schachter who asserted that:

The Charter is surely not to be construed as a lease of land or an insurance policy; it is a constitutional instrument whose broad phrases were designed to meet changing circumstances for an undefined future (189).

It appears that in 1945, the UN Charter was interpreted as a constitutional document and not merely as an international accord/treaty. This assertion is aptly reflected in the Preamble of the Charter-We the Peoples of the United Nations (Fassbender 555). Therefore, no one can dispute the fact that the UN Charter is the basis for constitutional document in the United Nation structure.

There is no doubt that the institutional system of the UN is imperfect. Nevertheless, this phenomenon does not prevent the UN from having a constitutional foundation. For instance, the UN General Assembly is a weak legislative body.

Nonetheless, the resolutions made by the General Assembly form a conjecture of legality in favour of behaviours that conforms to them as well as an assumption of illegality when such behaviours contradict them (Schreuer 118). What’s more, these decrees can function as a mechanism and as an expression of traditional international law.

Contrary to the basic recommendatory nature of UN General Assembly decrees, the UN Security Council boasts of legislative influence with regard to joint security (White 292).

What’s more, the Security Council functions as an executive unit which implements those resolutions. Although there is no clear separation of powers within the UN system, both the executive and legislative roles are allocated uniformly between the key political organs (White 292).

As a matter of fact, the UN Security Council has not only executive and legislative powers but also possesses partial quasi-judicial authority to propose settlement terms as well as to establish whether there is an act of aggression, breach of peace or a threat to the peace (White 292). In addition, there is the International Court of Justice’s arbitrative role (although it is weak compared to state jurisdictions).

The Security Council’s authority regarding legal disagreements between states is based on approval from UN agencies and organs (White 292). The Council’s role as a constitutional court is therefore susceptible to inquiry although its jurisprudence is somewhat moving in that direction (White 401).

There is clearly lack of separation of power within the UN system. The problem is also prevalent among its specialized agencies. The major benefit associated with separation of powers is the enhancement of the rule of law. For example, the separation of power averts the enactment, application and enforcement of laws by one body.

As a result, the absence of institutionalized judicial review within the UN system weakens the rule of law in the same manner the concentration of power (under joint security) in the hands of the UN Security Council does (White 293).

This means that the UN Security Council is effectively allowed to function as legislator, judge and enforcer with regard to the sphere of joint security (Gwynn 1). Thus, the apparent lack of separation of power in UN system is likely to result in power misuse.

In spite of the apparent structural shortages within the UN system, the Charter as well as the constitutional documents of the specialized agencies creates an intricate constitutional pecking order. Nevertheless, it can be argued that they merely represent a weak constitutional dispensation.

It can also be argued that the UN Constitution is synonymous with the rudimentary rules that govern a local golf club given that both constitute an organization. However, opinions about this issue vary among different scholars. For example, Bernhardt asserts that “the Charter has become the constitution of the international community” (1117) while Arangio-Ruiz claims that “the Charter is a mere inter-state compact” (9).

However, other scholars have adopted a cautious approach by enumerating the shortages prevalent in the UN’s constitutional structure as well as the organization’s achievements in securing conformity with its resolutions.

For example, the UN’s remarkable success in averting Iraq’s antagonism against Kuwait in the early 1990s is contrasted with its failure to secure peace in Rwanda (in 1994), Somalia (1992-3) and the former Yugoslavia in 1992-5 period (Dupuy 20).

The UN Legal Structure

There is no doubt that the UN structure is based on law. The UN’s legislative capacity has broadened over the years as the international community shifts from a horizontal structure that relies on state approval towards a purely hierarchical one (Kirgis 274).

For instance, the decrees by IAEA, ICAO, ITU and WHO are generally acknowledged and implemented as sets of laws for the international community (Schermers 117). The UN legal system can be evaluated from three phases: legislative; interpretation and application of law; and enforcement and compliance.

The Legislative Phase

The UN agencies generate laws in remarkable ways. Most of these laws transcend the conventional foundations of international law (i.e. customs and treaties).

These laws include: quasi-judicial pronouncements; guidelines; codes of practice; declarations; binding regulations; and excellent decrees with reporting requirements as well as enforcement systems (White 295). Most of these laws represent a paradigm shift from the conservative ways of making laws in the international arena.

The Interpretation and Application Phase

The interpretation and application of law occurs on a continuous basis all over the UN structure via the agencies, bodies and organs in light of the principle of effectiveness (White 296).

As the UN’s structure and legislation broadens, in terms of quality and quantity, the likelihood of some agencies and bodies transcending the constitutional laws which define their operations is apparent (White 296). However, there are several rudimentary laws that deem certain activities by the UN as unconstitutional or ultra vires (White 296). Nevertheless, the real issue at hand is the absence of a suitable judicial review system.

Compliance and Enforcement Phase

Compliance and enforcement is usually the last phase in any legal structure. White asserts that the major huddle experienced by the UN legal structure is the compliance and enforcement phase (296). Although the UN has enacted a number of legislations, little attention has been given with regard to the strategies of ensuring compliance (White 296).

Nevertheless, the UN is striving to improve compliance and enforcement of its laws at different levels. For example, the UN’s specialized agencies have adopted reporting and supervision as a common strategy to ensure compliance with the law (White 296). States are now obligated to submit reports on their compliance endeavours for inspection by a UN body.

The naming and shaming strategy is occasionally complemented in the human rights sphere whereby states (under elective protocol) permit certain persons within their authority to assume cases of human rights abuses executed by the state before a UN agency (White 296). Nevertheless, these strategies are usually ineffective when dealing with unrelenting offenders.

Consequently, the UN has considered adopting a number of intrusive strategies in order to decrease incidences of human rights abuses in many countries. An armed peace-keeping force is an example of an intrusive strategy adopted to ensure compliance with UN declarations.

UN peace-keeping force has evolved into a multi-dimensional strategy that encompasses the conventional blue-helmeted force as well as human rights and development element (White 297). The Sierra Leone case is a clear demonstration that the UN peace-keeping force is in dire need of reforms although this should not undermine the successful operations undertaken by UN forces in Mozambique, Nicaragua and Namibia (White 297).

Other coercive strategies adopted by the UN include conditional loans and aid that are granted to those states that respect UN decrees and suspension of delinquent states from UN membership (White 297).

The Security Council has also invoked article 41 of the UN Charter to impose other non-military enforcement actions such as economic sanctions on rogue states (White 297). In addition, the Security Council has sanctioned the use of armed forces on several occasions in countries such as Kosovo, East Timor, Bosnia, Somalia and the Gulf region to enforce compliance (White 297).

The UN judicial system represents another major hurdle in the enforcement system. It is worth mentioning that the International Court is somewhat weak with regard to judicial enforcement. The Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, represents a significant step with regard to holding accountable and punishing individuals who commit war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity (White 298).

However, the ability of the International Court to discharge its functions is severely compromised by the UN Security Council which focuses its judicial enforcement efforts at individual level rather than at the state level (White 298). Thus, there is an urgent need to evaluate whether the UN’s judicial enforcement, at individual level rather than state level, is the most successful strategy to guarantee respect for UN principles.

Works Cited

Arangio-Ruiz, Gaetano. “The Federal Analogy and UN Charter Interpretation: A Crucial Issue.” European Journal of International Law 8.1(1997): 9. Print.

Bernhardt, Rudolf. The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994. Print.

Crawford, James. The Charter of the United Nations as a Constitution. London: British Institute, 1997. Print.

Dupuy, Marie. “The Constitutional Dimension of the Charter of the United Nations Revisited.” Max Planck Yearbook of UN Law 1(1997): 20. Print.

Falk, Richard. The United Nations and a Just World Order. Boulder: Westview, 1991. Print.

Fassbender, Bardo. “The United Nations Charter as a Constitution of the International Community.” Columbia Journal of Transnational 529(1998): 555. Print.

Fox, Gay and Brad Roth. Democratic Governance and International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Print.

Gwynn, Barbara. The Meaning of the Separation of Powers. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1965. Print.

Johnston, Douglas. Structures and Processes of International Law. Dordrecht: Nijhoff, 1983. Print.

Kirgis, Frederic. International Organizations in their Legal Settings. St. Paul: West, 1993. Print.

Schachter, Oscar. “Review of Kelsen: The law of the United Nations.” Yale Law Journal 61(1951): 189. Print.

Schermers, Henry. “We the Peoples.” Max Planck Yearbook of UN Law 1(1997): 117. Print.

Schreuer, Christoph. “Recommendations and the Traditional Sources of International Law.” German Yearbook of International Law 20(1997): 118. Print.

White, Nigel. “The United Nations System: Conference, Contract or Constitutional Order?” Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law 4(2000): 281-299. Print.

White, Nigel. “To Review or Not to Review? The Lockerbie cases before the World Court.” Leiden Journal of International Law 12(1999): 401.

Zimmern, Alfred. The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 1918-1935. New York: Russell and Russell, 1969. Print.

Introduction

Weiss is a commonplace figure in the global scene if his authorship on matters concerning global institutions is anything to go by. What is wrong with the United Nations and how to fix it is not Weiss’ premier on the subject of the UN. He has written other volumes on the same such as UN Voices: the struggle for development and social justice, as well as the UN and the changing world politics.

However, this volume stands aloof in its approach to tackling the inefficiencies of the international body. The book employs a problem-solution approach in identifying what ails in the UN and offers remedies as what can be done to salvage the situation.

Organization of the book

Weiss organizes the book into two parts. The first part diagnoses what is wrong with the UN, and the second provides some prognoses for fixing the problem. The aim of Part One of the book, titled, ‘Diagnosing the ills’ is to spell out in four chapters the four main shortcomings of the United Nations (Weiss 2009 p.1-169).

Illustrations in each chapter detail one or more salient examples from the world body’s three substantive areas of work: international peace and security; human rights; and sustainable development. Weiss maintains this subject template throughout his work, although the reader will find different illustrations for each of the main areas of work within every chapter.

Summary of the book

As stated earlier, Weiss opts to take problem-solution approach in this volume with the first part of his work dedicated to tackling the challenges that the UN is encountering.

He asserts that the problems that the international body is facing are due to poor international leadership especially given that most states are bound to advance their interests. Weiss believes that the solution to the current challenges facing the UN will not be solved by performing a miracle but cites examples of how they can be overcome through various instances (Weiss 2009 p. 155).

He holds that it is feasible to change global organizations like the UN if people rely on hope rather than their own wisdom to do so. The fifth chapter of the book, which is the first in its second part titled ‘Redefining national interests’ begins with spotty progress that has been made in recasting interests in terms of international responsibility and good global citizenship.

Particularly, this chapter examines closely the emergence of the ‘responsibility to protect’ and other human rights norms that are making inroads in the fortress of state sovereignty (Evans 2008).

Weiss looks at the numerous efforts, some successful and some not, to centralize authority and coordinate responses among UN agencies in ‘Truly delivering as one’. He also discusses alternative strategies for funding the UN’s budget (Weiss 2009 p. 173-190).

In the concluding chapter ‘Reinvigorating the international civil service’, Weiss highlights the need to rediscover the idealistic notions of the international civil service (Weiss 2009 p. 191-214).

The theme of the book

In the entire book, the underlying argument posited by Weiss is simple and direct. He states that national sovereignty is the underlying organizing stipulation of the United Nations. Since World War II, revolutionary change and the new demands of a global world have steadily reduced the relevance and importance of national sovereignty in most areas of human activity (Puchala 2007).

At the United Nations, however, national sovereignty is as strong, or stronger, than ever. Weiss states that in order to prove this, there is no need to look further, but should examine the obstacles that confront the UN in dealing with conflicts in the developing countries (Weiss 2009 p. 107).

He adds that the history of the UN has been, among other things, a continuous and often unsuccessful effort to find a working balance between national sovereignty, on the other hand, and international responsibility and effective action on the other.

If global warming, terrorism, and nuclear proliferation are serious threats – as they surely are – we simply cannot limp along indefinitely with the current, severely limited generation of international organizations (Jolly, Emmerij, & George 2009).

In order to devise and to rally support for serious reform, it is important that the current working of the United Nations be far better understood than now than is now the case (Fasulo 2009).

Weiss provides a clear and highly readable account of the main activities of the organization, as well as brilliant analysis of its contemporary operations and problems. Weiss examines the relationship between the secretariat and intergovernmental bodies, both in the UN itself and in the UN system of specialized agencies and special programs.

Conclusion

In a bold and original conclusion, Weiss proceeds to outline the need to go further than the present stage of international ‘governance’, which has manifestly too many anomalies to provide an adequate response to the kind of problems the human race now faces (Weiss 2009 p. 192).

This is a bracing departure from the timidity and circumlocution on such subjects often induced by the jeremiads of our contemporary breed of neo-super-nationalists (Kennedy 2007). One cannot doubt the timely publication of this volume especially at a time when the international organization is in perpetual crisis (Ryan 2000).

As such, the volume will be appropriate to all those who are in the academic fraternity, as well as decision makers with keen interests in the politics of the globe. In addition, the book will also prove to be handy to anyone who has an interest in the future of the UN and that of international cooperation in general.

Bibliography

Evans G. 2008. The responsibility to protect: ending mass atrocity crimes once and for all. London: Brooks Institution Press. 349 p.

Fasulo L. 2009. An insider’s guide to the UN. New York : Yale University Press. 262 p.

Jolly R, Emmerij L, and George O. 2009. UN ideas that changed the world. Indiana: Indiana University Press. 310 p.

Kennedy P. 2007. The parliament of man: the past, present, and future of the United Nations. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing. 384 p.

Puchala DJ. 2007. United Nations politics: international organization in a divided world. New York: Pearson Prentice Hall. 246 p.

Ryan S. 2000. The United Nations and international politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 209 p.

Weiss TG. 2009. What is wrong with the United Nations and how to fix it? Cambridge: Polity. 292 p.

Introduction

After the world wars I and II, many leaders of the world saw the need of putting in place proper laws and institutions to govern the world in a manner that would make it very difficult for another world war to happen.

One of the key steps towards this direction was the establishment and strengthening of the United Nations, so that it could have the power and means of maintaining law and order in the world. This assignment is a discussion of how and why the United Nations, through the United Nations Security Council has been attempting to manage world order and why and how it has been unsuccessful.

Discussion

The term world order or new world order as its popularly known as, is used to refer to a bureaucratic system of governance of the world which advocates for global governance in disregard to traditional State sovereignty which advocates for national governance (Slaughter, 2005).

The term has its history from what was referred to as “illuminati” which was the movement responsible for the French revolution as well as revolutions in Europe (Stauffer & Williamson, 2005). Recently, new world order has taken the form of institutions which have global influence, appeal and presence like the United Nations and its affiliated institutions as well as the so called Breton wood institutions (Balogun, 2011).

One of the key UN affiliated institutions which has been trying to propagate and manage the idea of world order is the United Nations Security Council, which is concerned with global security. The UN, through the UN Security Council has been in the fore front in attempts to have a world which is centralized in terms of governance, administration, justice as well as in terms of trade.

The main idea behind the centralization of world’s governance is that such a world would be safer to live in, especially after the September 11 terror attacks on the United States.

It is worth mentioning that the United States actually controls the Un Security Council due to its veto power. In fact, many international relations analysts have argued that there is actually no difference between the United States and the UN Security Council. A good example to illustrate this scenario is the US led invasion on Iraq in 2003, in which the Security Council was unable to prevent the US from doing the invasion, despite the fact that there were no enough justifications for the invasion.

In its attempts to manage word order, the UN Security Council has been employing the strategy of carrot and a stick, in which countries of the world, especially the developing ones are given aid with strings attached. In some situations, they are required to relinquish part of their sovereignty to international bodies like the international criminal court and several other international treaties and conventions. Those counties which fail to comply are not only slapped with economic sanctions, but also military actions as well.

Why the UN Security Council attempts have been unsuccessful

The initial intention of establishing and maintaining world order was good. But due to the politics of domination between the rich and the poor nations of the world, the idea has been faced with enormous challenges, which have made the UN Security Council strain without much success in the management of word order.

It seems that there has been a growing resistance to the new world order which attempts to concentrate resources and power around the ruling elite and the bureaucrats at the expense of the common persons or citizens commonly referred by Karl max as the have nots (Milanović, 2010).

For instance, the recent uprisings in Arabic countries like Egypt, Libya and Tunisia were seen by many as an indication of civilian unrest and discontedment with the status of affairs in many countries which tend to pursue, propagate or support the ideology of a new world order.

The unrest in these countries led to the ousting of the ruling bureaucrats, who had taken the advantage of the capitalist ideology to propagate inequality, lack of fairness and equity between various segments of the society which exists in form of social classes, with the upper social class enjoying the benefits of capitalism in form of surplus, as the low social class suffer from poverty, unemployment and lack of basic social amenities (Milanović, 2010).

There have also been grassroots movements in form of civil society organizations which are formed by countries’ non-governmental sector. These civil society organizations have been working in a coordinated manner to push governments of countries to respect human rights, provide health care and education to the citizens. The idea behind the formation of civil society organizations is to empower the common citizens with information about their rights and the responsibilities of governments (Barlow, 2003)

The universal declarations of human rights agitates for the universal respect of human rights, civil liberties and freedoms like the freedom of worship, movement and expression. These rights and civil liberties advocated for by the civil society have the potential of affecting the stability of the new world order, especially in the fight against terrorism, which is thought to succeed under the limitation of some of the civil liberties and political rights as stipulated in the United States Patriotic Act enacted after the terrorist attacks of United States in 2001 (Abele, 2005).

The international criminal system of justice is intended to curb impunity and the violation of basic fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens. It is aimed at detaining and punishing leaders who violate the rights of their citizens. This has happened especially for countries like Rwanda, Yugoslavia among others. However, the court has been explained by many critics as being characterized by double standards between the rich and poor nations.

The impact of the international court system on security is that many countries of the world are improving their political systems to become more democratic instead of dictatorial or authoritative. This to some extend has led to increased freedom of expression of citizens which in a way has reduced the grip of the rich nations on the power to control and manipulate the resources of the world.

Economically, the grassroots movements have been able to lobby for increased opportunities for countries to do business with each other. The movements have also been very instrumental in pushing governments to offer business opportunities and provide friendly loaning facilities to citizens.

The world trade organization has been in the fore front in lobbying for increased interaction between nations in terms of doing business. It has also been working closely with individual governments to stream line their loaning facilities to be more friendly and accessible to many citizens (Barlow, 2003).

The World Bank and the IMF have been working hand in hand with the world trade organization to offer financial support to the developing countries to fight poverty and disease, like Hiv/Aids and malaria. These institutions have empowered many poor countries to boost their levels of education, health care and overall, their economies.

The economies of the poor countries have been improving from time to time, thereby reducing their dependency on the rich countries. This has been compromising the establishment of a new world order because the number of countries which may be manipulated for the gain of the rich countries is declining.

Technologically, the grassroots movements and institutions have been working hand in hand with governments to be more open to technology transfer. Many countries of the world are now adopting the use of technology, especially the information communication technology like the use of the electronic mail, the use of the mobile phone networks as well as the use of electronic money transfer systems like wire transfer, money bookers, western union, PayPal among others (Chorafas, 1988).

The use of information communication technology and the internet has enabled people to improve the way in which they communicate to each other in many sectors. In the trade sector, many people have been able to do business in various countries due to improved use of information and financial technology. Doing trade and business nowadays has become more efficient and convenient than ever, which has been advantageous to the economies of the poor or developing countries.

In the education sector, information technology has opened up more opportunities for people to do research and improve their academic qualifications in a friendly, convenient and efficient manner.

This has led to increased literacy levels in many countries, which has got a positive impact on the economy of many countries because many people are able to understand the nature of business transactions and how to undertake business in a sustainable manner.

This has consequently worked against the establishment of the new world order in which the rich states are able to consolidate resources and opportunities at the expense of the poor countries.

At the global level, the advancement in technology has been a growing concern especially the advancement of nuclear energy. Some emerging economies in Asia and Middle East are increasingly embracing nuclear technology as an alternative to the use of coal, crude oil and natural gas as sources of energy.

The use of nuclear energy is presumed to be environmental friendly and to possess the ability to generate massive energy to power the growth of economies of countries of the world. However, the use of nuclear technology has been a growing concern to the United States especially in regard to the issue of misuse of nuclear technology.

The fear is that nations like North Korea, Iran and Syria which are perceived as having a hidden agenda in their nuclear programs and described by the previous US president George W. Bush as “axis of evil” may use their nuclear technology to harm the United States, its allies and the world in general.

Nuclear energy may lead to nuclear terrorism. It may also have serious negative implications on the environment especially in regard to the disposal of nuclear waste if not properly managed. All these nuclear related issues are perceived as working against the establishment and strengthening of the new world order in which the elite concentrate the possession of technology and even the energy used for boosting economic productivity in countries of the world.

If the poor, emerging or developing economies are allowed to pursue nuclear energy, they will not only act as potential terrorist threats but would also act as serious competitors of the advanced economies like the United States and members of the European Union and the establishment of the new world order as well.

Conclusion

Throughout the discussion in this assignment, what has emerged is that the powerful States have been attempting, through the United Nations Security Council to establish a bureaucratic arrangement of world’s governance in which the elite would be controlling world’s resources and power.

The main idea behind this has been to ensure that the super powers maintain the status quo in terms of world’s politics, economy, culture and technology through the propagation of their ideologies and influence to the less powerful nations of the world.

However, there has been a lot of challenges in establishing the new world order, which have to some extend compromised the economic, political, cultural and technological security of the rich nations. The discussion may be summed up as a competition between the bureaucrats and the common person, whom, through the assistance of grassroots movements and institutions has been empowered to rise up and challenge the exploitations and discriminations which comes with the establishment of a new world order.

The United Nations Security Council has also been hindered by the presence of many non-governmental organizations, which work in partnership with governments of the developing world to empower the citizens with education, which is a very important tool in fighting the rich nation’s imperialism.

Education has enabled many countries in the developing world to embark on research, especially on agriculture and technology, which has enabled them to become self-reliant in terms of food and technological advancement. This has denied the rich nations, through the UN Security Council an opportunity to propagate the idea of world order, especially through giving aid to these countries, with some strings attached.

Reference List

Abele, R.P.(2005). “A User’s Guide to the USA Patriot Act and Beyond”. Oxford OX2 6DP: University Press of America.

Balogun, M.J. (2011). Hegemony and Sovereign Equality: The Interest Contiguity Theory in International Relations. Oxford OX4 2DQ: Springer.

Barlow, A.L. (2003). Between Fear and Hope: Globalization and Race in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Chorafas, D.N. (1988). Electronic Funds Transfer. Wellington Square: Butterworths.

Milanović, B.(2010). The Haves and the Have-Nots: A Brief and Idiosyncratic History of Global Inequality. Oxford OX2 6DP: Basic Books.

Slaughter, A.M. (2005). A New World Order. Woodstock OX20 1TW: Princeton University Press.

Stauffer, V., & Williamson, B.J. (2005). New England and the Bavarian Illuminati. Oxford OX1 3BN: The Invisible College Press, LLC.

The UN must recognize that China has emerged as a major power in the world. Thus, the UN must understand the role China will have in the world if it emerges as a superpower. Specifically, China’s approaches to security, communist ideologies, currency, weapons, and influences on the world economy should be major concerns to the UN. The most critical matter for China today is human rights and political instability. The government does not tolerate any form of opposition, and it considers such attempts as interference with internal affairs and dissidence. China views the world with suspicion. On the other hand, the world has divided opinions about China. Sanaa Arora notes that superpower traditionally reflects “military, economic, political and cultural strengths and dominance” (Arora 1).

The economic reforms of the 1970s in China resulted in a prosperous nation. China’s Gross Domestic Product has grown steadily. China has enhanced its trading abilities with the West and Africa. Moreover, the country has accumulated large foreign currency reserves in the world and has embarked on foreign investments. The economic performance of China has been superb.

China can maintain such high rates of growth because of a large population, which provides cheap labor and a ready market. It also has vast resources. China has strived to overtake the US as the world’s largest economy, but not just yet. Analysts put it so close (Arora 1).

China started to upgrade its military in the 1980s. Today, it has increased the pace of its military upgrade (International Institute for Strategic Studies 152-5). Although China faces no major threat in the region, China has continued to prepare its military in readiness for potential wars. Past experiences like Tiananmen Square Massacre affected China’s relationship with the West. The country also analyzed the impacts of the Gulf War and its position. Consequently, China had to formulate a new defense approach for engaging in current combats, which could involve technology.

From past wars, China has turned to build electronic warfare, unethical cyber theft practices, and the development of advanced weapons. It has also embarked on modernizing its air force and naval capabilities with rapid response approaches. Moreover, China has enhanced its military logistical supports.

The country’s upgrade of its military drew different reactions from the world. Others claim that modernization was inevitable because China had old equipment. On the other hand, other critics have raised concerns about China’s assertive approaches to territorial disputes and military modernization. The country has also turned to nuclear programs. Such missiles can even reach North America. Also, China wants to control space and cyberspace. These strategies show the country’s desire to dominate the world.

The UN must worry about China as a superpower. It has a growing economic strength alongside a large-scale upgrade of the military. Thus, the UN must understand how China will use its power if it becomes a superpower. So far, China has used its new power to assert itself aggressively in the territorial disputes with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, and other neighbors. Such aggressive tendencies have created tension in the region and friction with US relations. These claims show that China may resort to the use of force to control the islands. Thus, the security of neighboring countries with China as a superpower must worry about the UN.

The development in China as a possible superpower will only raise security concerns in the world. China’s growing power has poised it as a security threat to the region. In the past, China had engaged all its neighbors in some forms of disputes. Thus, it feels insecure as the region seeks strategic responses from the West. These diplomatic tensions can severely hurt China as a superpower. The country has limited chances of strengthening its position as a world leader. Many Asian countries have favored the role of the US in the region.

On the other hand, China only has rogue states as real allies. These include Zimbabwe, Venezuela, and Cuba, among others. These are countries under political dictatorship and manipulation of powers to favor incumbents. These are political pariahs of the world. These relationships are quite artificial because they rely on China’s quest for natural resources in exchange for backing at the UN against sanctions.

While one may argue that geography does not favor China’s security situations as a potential superpower, its dictatorship regime has thwarted emerging democratic candidates, which has contributed to its human rights abuse. Democratic and influential states cannot ally with a dictator. Therefore, it is difficult for China to form any meaningful security alliance with democratic states. China has failed to find a real strategic alliance with its partners because the country does not share security interests and ideological values with others because of the secrecy of the regime. Thus, there is no trust between China and its partners. As a result, China has resorted to ‘transactional diplomacy.’ Minxin Pei refers to this as “romping around the world with a fat checkbook, supporting (usually poor, isolated, and decrepit) regimes like Angola and Sudan in return for favorable terms on natural resources or voting against Western-sponsored resolutions criticizing China’s human rights record” (Pei 1). Thus, the rising superpower will have to address its communist ideologies, territorial disputes, and policies before qualifying as a superpower.

The UN must also express its concern over political stability and human rights issues in China. The Communist party has asserted its control over a billion people forcefully. The major agenda of the party is to retain power. According to China, issues of creating a democratic system and tolerating dissidence are strategies to impede its domestic affairs. Thus, if China becomes a superpower, then the UN will face serious challenges on how to handle it.

The public opinion regarding the role of China as a superpower may be split. The UN must find a way of dealing with rising China. A lack of secrecy approach to China’s situation could lead to a transparent superpower, a secure democracy, and a diplomatic state. Therefore, the UN must not tolerate or concede to China’s demands. Instead, the UN requires firm policies, and it must not engage in China’s games of distrust and suspicion. Ideally, a superpower must be a stable democracy, which can enjoy global supports. However, the secrecy of China and its present problems do not guarantee any promising position if the country becomes a superpower.

As the UN prepares for a possibility of China becoming a superpower, it must not underestimate security challenges, which China will pose to the Asian region and the West. Consequently, the UN requires a feasible security mechanism to control China and its rogue allies.

The economic transformation, the dollar and Yuan peg, trade imbalance, modernization of the military, and ‘transactional diplomacy’ of China have targeted the current superpower, the US. China strives to counter the current power balance. The UN must recognize that China has displayed open dictatorship in approaches to matters related to territorial claims and human rights abuse. China may face challenges of providing food to its large population. However, if the current rates of economic growth and military spending continue, then China may rise as a superpower and use its position to spread security threats, communism and control global trades with its Yuan as the global currency. Moreover, China aims to dominate technologies and the global economy. This implies that the country intends to create a foundation, which is stronger than that of the US.

The UN must ensure that China resolves security issues in the region. First, China must resolve all territorial issues with all its neighbors. Second, it must support a collective security approach and abandon the secrecy of the regime. Third, China must eliminate mistrust and fears among its neighbors. Also, China must enhance its relationship with the US. The country must also seek for real allies based on sound policies and principles rather than the current artificial approach of transactional diplomacy. Finally, China must embrace democracy in its political system. This would ensure support from the US and other democratic states. However, the UN must also remember that China’s interests are to protect its security and interests around the world, which happens as the country ignore other regions and the West (Britt 1). Certainly, with these tendencies and challenges, China may not promote the world order (Dellios 1).

Works Cited

Arora, Sanaa. China – The Next Superpower? 2011. Web.

Britt, Robert Roy. Will China Become the No. 1 Superpower? 2008. Web.

Dellios, Rosita. “The Rise of China as a Global Power.” The Culture Mandala 6.2 (2005): 1. Print.

International Institute for Strategic Studies. The Military Balance 2004-2005. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.

Pei, Minxin. The Loneliest Superpower: How did China end up with only rogue states as its real friends? 2012. Web.