Brief Synopses of New Arabic Language Publications

Brief Synopses of New Arabic-Language Publications

United Nations (UN) Security Council (UNSC) resolutions (UNSCRs) are adopted by a vote of the five permanent members and ten non-permanent members of the UNSC. Each UNSCR is understood to be part of the “primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security” of the UN. The Indonesian government has been encouraged by various parties to make a legal instrument that would enforce the UNSCRs. Such an instrument would serve to bridge and reduce gaps in the rule of law regarding the enforcement of UNSCRs for nations. However, the government of Indonesia faces several challenges in implementing legal instruments for the UNSCRs. This article maintains that it is crucial to study accommodative policies regarding the national enforcement of UNSCRs by considering the example of Singapore. Singapore has special laws that respond to UNSCRs (The UN Act Chapter 339-UN Act). UN Act 339 is the legal umbrella in Singapore for the government’s implementation of UNSCRs. The UN Act is also an attempt by the Singaporean government to carry out its international obligations to the United Nations.

Review

Brief Synopses of New Arabic-Language Publications

United Nations (UN) organs have the primary responsibility in the collective security system. The UN Security Council is a body with broad responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security. Accordingly, this body makes recommendations and decisions with the aim of establishing international peace and security. It also enacts measures that do not involve, but also those that involve the use of armed force. In relation to the Security Council, the UN General Assembly has a subsidiary role in the maintenance of international peace and security. The Republic of Austria was a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council from 1990 to 1992. It was important for Austria that the UN system of collective security functions properly, having in mind the fact that the territory of the former Yugoslavia is in its immediate vicinity, as well as the fact that the basic principles of international law were violated, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this regard, the officials of the Republic of Austria at the United Nations initiated, participated in the preparation and voting of several UN Security Council resolutions with the aim of implementing certain collective security measures in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The most important acts related to the implementation of the set of collective security measures adopted by the United Nations organs with the strong involvement of the Republic of Austria are: UN Security Council Resolutions 749 and 752 (activities of the Republic of Austria in stopping the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina at an early stage), UN Security Council Resolutions 757 (economic sanctions against FR Yugoslavia), UN Security Council Resolution 761 (sending UNPROFOR to Sarajevo Airport), UN Security Council Resolution 764 (proposal to impose coercive measures), Council Resolutions 770 and 771 UN Security Council (delivery of humanitarian aid to Bosnia and Herzegovina and its right to self-defense), UN Security Council Resolution 779 (right to return the refugees), UN Security Council Resolution 781 (establishment of a no-fly zone), Security Council Resolution 787 UN (proposal for the establishment of protected zones), UN General Assembly Resolutions 48/88 and 49/10 (request for lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina and Herzegovina).

WOMEN, PEACE AND SECURITY ON THE 15TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ADOPTION OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1325

The fact that many groups designated as terrorist are party to non-international armed conflicts raises tensions between international humanitarian law (IHL) and international counter-terrorism law. One such area of tension – the topic of this article – relates to the granting of amnesties. IHL encourages the use of amnesties, and United Nations (UN) bodies have welcomed the granting of amnesties as part of peace agreements. At the same time, several UN Security Council resolutions adopted since 9/11 require States to ensure that persons responsible for terrorist acts, including those committed within situations of armed conflict, are brought to justice. This article analyses the ways in which such counter-terrorism rules impact States’ implementation of the amnesty provisions in IHL, and, in turn, how that interaction shapes the sustainability of the peace which amnesty schemes can facilitate. It makes two main arguments. First, UN Security Council resolutions on terrorism include certain binding obligations that must inform States’ implementation of the amnesty provision in IHL. Second, the indeterminacy of certain binding obligations in the UN Security Council resolutions, allied to the weak nature of the IHL amnesty obligation, creates challenges for States seeking to comply with both sets of rules. After outlining the rationales for amnesties under IHL and the UN Security Council framework on terrorism (Section 2), this article examines the varying normative weight and specificity of the rules at issue (Sections 3 and 4) and illustrates the inconsistent State practice to date (Section 5). Finally, this article proposes some guidance on the implementation of these two sets of rules (Section 6).

The international law of money laundering is found in several United Nations (UN) crime suppression treaties, United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions, and a body of soft law, some of which arguably has crystallized as customary norms. Beginning with the 1988 UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Vienna Convention), states agreed to establish anti-money laundering (AML) measures in their domestic law for drug-related offenses. This was followed by AML measures against organized crime and corruption, respectively, in the 2000 UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention), including its protocols and the 2003 UN Convention against Corruption (Merida Convention). The AML measures include the criminalization of money laundering, powers to freeze and confiscate the proceeds of crime, duties of the private sector to generate financial intelligence, the establishment of financial intelligence units (FIUs), and formal legal cooperation arrangements between states, necessary given the transnational dimension of money laundering. While AML originally covered only property derived from crime, its measures were extended to property used to finance or carry out crimes, most notably for terrorist acts and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Though countries concluded a treaty against terrorist financing in 1999, it was not until after the events of 11 September 2001 that anti-terrorism financing norms, as part of the panoply of AML measures, were diffused around the world by UNSC resolutions. International bodies, including the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), have prepared model laws to assist countries to incorporate AML measures. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), established in 1989 by the G7 industrialized nations, is the most important and influential body in setting detailed international standards on AML. Through replication of its norms and functions by regional bodies, the FATF’s soft law of AML measures has hardened into near universal domestic AML laws, adopted to signify the integrity of a country’s financial systems. European nations extensively adopted AML measures by treaties and directives, sometimes going beyond FATF recommendations. As AML measures have grown in number and global significance, critical literature has grown, questioning their effectiveness, whether their benefits outweigh their costs, and whether they are justified from the standpoint of principles of criminal liability and human rights law. For more criminological literature, readers may wish to consult the Oxford Bibliographies in Criminology article Money Laundering. Research for this work was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. 17603319). Thanks to Sean Yau and Ting Yin Lau for their research assistance.

The issue I would like to pose in this chapter is about the grip of sexual violence on human security discourse. I do not want to address the violence itself, but to consider why many feminist — and even non-feminist — discussions about human rights and security have become inextricably connected to concerns about sexual violence, primarily but not exclusively against women. I consider here the United Nations (UN) Security Council resolutions on what is termed ‘human security’, and debates and media around them. I do so because I believe they are representative of an escalating emphasis on the horrors of sexual violence more generally within international human rights and humanitarian law, discourse and advocacy.

United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions are formal expressions of the will of the Security Council and are a necessary condition for almost all substantive United Nation actions on conflict. However, surprisingly little work has examined the nature, extent, and distribution of UNSC resolutions within internal conflicts. In this chapter, we present original data on UNSC resolutions paired with UCDP/PRIO data on civil conflicts. Using these data, we show that the distribution of UNSC resolutions on civil wars varies in important ways across both time and conflicts. We further illustrate that UNSC resolutions can differ substantially in their expressed sentiment towards conflict actors. We suggest here that information on UNSC resolutions can provide useful insight into latent preferences among members of the UNSC as well as help us understand how actors may respond to UN initiatives.

Zooming in on the serving European Union (EU) Member States and exploring the legal parameters defining regional actorness both directly and indirectly, this article analyzes the EU's representation at the United Nations (UN) Security Council. Looking at the theory and practice behind Articles 52, 23 and 103 of the UN Charter, we shed fresh light on the only provision in the European Treaties that explicitly referred to the UN Security Council, i.e. the former Article 19 of the EU Treaty. We define that provision as a regional interpretation of Article 103 of the UN Charter and discuss its implementation in day-to-day decision-making, especially as for economic and financial sanctions measures. Hereby, we focus on the negotiations leading to UN Security Council Resolution 1822(2008).

In October 2000, the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security. In addition to states, the resolution also calls on regional organizations to mainstream gender into all stages of all peacekeeping operations. Drawing on feminist institutionalism and a norm translation perspective, we argue that networks of norm entrepreneurs played an important role with respect to the incorporation of the resolution into the security policies of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the European Union (EU). The varying institutional contexts that the entrepreneurs faced in the two organizations nevertheless affected what they were able to accomplish and how, therefore in turn, the EU and the OSCE institutionalized UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the accompanying norms.

Finding justice for women in post-conflict situations such as is the case for the women in northern Uganda has proved to be a daunting challenge. In recent times, although efforts have focused on the ICC as an alternative avenue, a number of legal, policy, and attitudinal challenges from individuals, groups, institutions and states still pose difficulties and have proved obstacles for progress in the pursuit for justice against the perpetrators of crimes. As a result crimes such as rape, forced impregnation, sexual slavery, mutilation and abduction of children remain challenges to the very establishment of the ICC, and people looking up-to it as an alternative. Thus, women remain a fundamentally violated, abused and dehumanized category of justice seekers. This discusses how retributive justice is a preferred option for the women in northern Uganda in order to see justice dispensed against those who committed crimes against them during the conflict there. In this presentation, I define justice using John Rawl’s theory. Rawl’s opines that justice is the first virtue of social institution. Here, Rawls discusses the applicability of utilitarianism and of social contract mainly pointing out that the theory of justice as fairness is deontological while utilitarianism is teleological. I further show how the international system such as United Nations (UN), and other Human rights groups have tried to bring justice to women and children since they are the vulnerable groups that are most affected during armed conflict. I also point out the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women and Children in armed conflict which include; UN Resolutions 1325 (2000), 1888 (2009), 1860 (2009), and UN Resolution 1889 (2009) among others. The essay also shows the other means that have been used to bring peace in Northern Uganda. These include Amnesty Act (2000), traditional justice which was carried out through the reconciliation processes of; Mato oput and their shortcomings. Also the need for establishment of a special court which would supplement the role of the ICC. Finally I discuss the ICC and its role in trying to bring justice to the women in Northern Uganda as the best option in deterring future crimes.

The U.S. Secretary of State comments on the articles by Barry and Morin and colleagues concerning the importance of minimizing the impact of economic sanctions on public health.

IntroductionOn July 5, 2006, North Korea test-launched an array of missiles, which ended a self-imposed moratorium of eight years. Ten days after the missile test (on July 15, 2006), in its toughest official response to North Korean actions since 1994, the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted Resolution 1695. This resolution condemned the missile tests, demanded North Korea cease all activities related to its ballistic mi - ssile program, and required all member states to comply with measures limiting North Korea's access to missile-tested materials or technology. On October 9, 2006, North Korea set offits first nuclear test. The UN Security Council voted unanimously on October 14 to slap North Korea with trade, travel, and other as punishment for its claimed nuclear weapons test. This resolution (1718) is much stronger than the earlier resolutions; it calls for inspection of North Korea cargoes, bars the travel to UN member states of North Koreans responsible for North Korea's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program, requires UN member states to freeze the financial assets of North Korean people or entities designated by the UN as engaged in North Korean WMD activities, and requires the establishment of an oversight committee.Under the latest resolution (2094), tougher impose penalties on North Korean banking, travel, and trade, and were passed in a 15-0 vote that reflected the country's increased international isolation. China, the North's longtime benefactor, helped the United States draftthe resolution, in what outside experts called a sign of Beijing's growing annoyance with Pyongyang's defiant behavior on the nuclear issue. The Chinese had entreated the North Koreans not to proceed with the February 12, 2013, underground nuclear test, their third. It is questionable whether these new will work. In other words, will the compel North Korean leaders to comply fully with UN demands, or will they lead the North Korean masses to rebel against their leaders? This article discusses reasons for the possible failure of these new against North Korea, the consequences of their failure to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons, and policy options on a nuclear North Korea.The Effectiveness of Sanctions Against Outlaw CountriesThe term sanctions means restrictions on normal commercial relations with a target country, including trade, investment, and other cross-border activities. Economic are either unilateral or multilateral. A unilateral sanction is imposed by one country, such as the U.S., against another country, such as North Korea. Multilateral require the cooperation of at least two nations. The clearest examples of multilateral are those imposed by the Security Council of the United Nations.Multinational were relatively rare before 1990. The UN Security Council, obviously incapacitated due to Cold War-related veto powers, imposed only twice (Rhodesia in 1966 and South Africa in 1977) in the 45 years of its existence prior to the August 1990 embargo of Iraq.1 Since 1990, however, the UN Security Council has increasingly imposed economic to prevent, manage, or resolve violent conflict. When a UN sanction is imposed, all UN member nations are required to comply with the order and to enforce the sanction against the outlaw country.2The active utilization of as an instrument of U.S. foreign policy dates back to the aftermath of World War I, when U.S. President Woodrow Wilson suggested that the adoption of was a method that could keep the world free of war. However, empirical studies on the effectiveness of economic by Pape3 and others found that historically, have a poor track record. The rare success of cases such as South Africa is associated with unique factors that are unlikely to be found elsewhere. …