From: Biniam Haile \(SWE\) (eritrea.lave@comhem.se)
Date: Thu Apr 16 2009 - 16:06:19 EDT
The American Chronicle
The United Nations Security Council – Will It Ever Do Anything Right?
Berhane Alazar
April 15, 2009T
he United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is a body of the United
Nations tasked with keeping international peace and security. According
the United Nations Charter, its powers include the establishment of
peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions,
and the authorization of military action, which is exercised through
United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
Unlike the General Assembly, the United Nations Security Council does
not have true international representation. This has led to accusations
that the UNSC only addresses the strategic interests and political
motives of the permanent members. Any nation may be elected to serve a
temporary term on the Security Council, but critics have suggested that
this is inadequate. Rather, they argue, the number of permanent members
should be expanded to include non-nuclear powers, which would
democratize the organization. Still other nations have advocated
abolishing the concept of permanency altogether.
Another criticism of the Security Council involves the veto power of the
five permanent nations. As it stands, a veto from any of the permanent
members can halt any possible action the Council may take. One nation's
objection, rather than the opinions of a majority of nations, may
cripple any possible UN response to a crisis. For instance, John J.
Mearsheimer claimed that "since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security
Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of
vetoes cast by all the other Security Council members." Ironically,
Jeane Kirkpatric, a former US Ambassador to the UN described what takes
place in the Security Council as "more closely resembles a mugging than
either a political debate or an effort at problem-solving,"
The practice of the permanent members meeting privately and then
presenting their resolutions to the full council as a fait accompli has
also drawn fire. According to Erskine Childers, "the vast majority of
members - North as well as South - have made very clear about their
distaste for the way three Western powers behave in the Council, like a
private club of hereditary elite-members who secretly come to decisions
and then emerge to tell the grubby elected members that they may now
rubber-stamp those decisions."
Other critics object to the idea that the UN is a "Democratic
organization", saying that it represents the interests of the
governments of the nations who form it and not necessarily the
individuals within those nations.
Another concern is that the five permanent members of the UN Security
Council are five of the top ten largest arms dealing countries in the
world, and yet, they are expected to resolve armed conflicts. – Go
figure!
How about the much talked about "UN Resolutions" their meanings and
their effectiveness?
Since 1946 to date, the UNSC has passed some 1900 resolutions, which are
voted on by the "fifteen members of the UNSC". If the council cannot
reach consensus or a passing vote on a resolution, they may choose to
produce a non-binding "Presidential Statement" instead of a Resolution.
Although I do not have the exact number, it is perhaps fair to assume
that the unimplemented UN resolutions far outweigh the implemented ones.
Actually, are there any implemented ones? There may be many reasons why
many of these resolutions fail to be implemented. But, by far the most
prevalent reason for their un-implementation is because perhaps many of
the resolutions are neither fair, balanced, appropriate nor conducive
for peace and security, which by definition, resolutions are supposed to
entice.
The latest victim of such biased and somewhat convoluted resolution or
"Presidential Statement" was the Democratic People´s Republic of Korea.
Perhaps not surprisingly, North Korea´s Foreign Ministry issued a
statement "flatly rejecting" the UN statement and that it will resume
its nuclear weapons program; and will never again take part in the
six-party denuclearization talks.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/98583
----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----