Nations Security Council Resolution Research Articles

Cyprus in the Security Council Resolutions from 1960 to 2021 (Failed Conflict Resolution)

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the United Nations Security Council's resolutions on Cyprus within the framework of the conflict resolution approach. Due to the conflict resolution approach, the position of Turkey, which is on the other side of the conflict and is the guarantor state, is also included in the evaluation with some suggestions. In this context, 152 Security Council resolutions between 1960 and 2021 have been examined. The results show that the Security Council has not been analyzed Cyprus' recent history well. Even the proposal to return to the 1960 Nicosia Treaty is a concrete indicator of this fact. In this sense, the Security Council has not been successful in terms of conflict resolution on Cyprus issue. On the other hand, Turkey, condemned within the framework of the Security Council resolutions, has not been able to explain itself well to the international community regarding Cyprus. The conflict resolution approach at least points that Turkey and Turkish Cypriots have also arguments to put forward for a satisfying solution.

Foreign Terrorist Fighters and the UN Investigative Team to Support Domestic Efforts to Hold ISIS Accountable for War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide Committed in Iraq: Building a Bridge that Should Be Used

After examining the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions referred to the foreign fighters who joined the ranks of ISIS in Iraq and Syria andthe UN Investigative Team to support domestic efforts to hold ISIS accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed in Iraq (UNITAD or the Investigative Team) this article brings both contents together in order to ascertain whether there may be gaps or problems which should be addressed, since both developments were prompted by the UNSC. It is explored whether there may be certain inconsistencies, such as the one relating to the emphasis placed on different crimes, depending on the resolutions in question. Thus, those related to FTFs focus on terrorism crimes, while those related to UNITAD refer to atrocity crimes. Hereinafter the action and evolution of UNITAD is examined, in order to determine whether it might be helpful to overcome some existing barriers and avoid impunity for atrocity crimes. It will be concluded that UNITAD may provide substantial support, not only in relation to trials in Iraq, but also in third States, by providing useful tools or evidence to prosecute FTFs. Seizing this opportunity will require further action, which will be crucial to promote accountability and justice.

The relationship between international humanitarian law and asset freeze obligations under United Nations sanctions

AbstractWhile challenges may persist with respect to the relationship between counterterrorism (CT) and humanitarian action, it is at least understood that CT measures must comply with international humanitarian law (IHL). Clarifying the relationship between this body of law and CT measures is one of the modest but important innovations of United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 2462. At a minimum, references to IHL in this resolution leave a pathway for States to take measures to preserve impartial humanitarian action from the effects of CT, and at most, they prescribe that States should take such measures. Progress in clarifying the relationship between UN sanctions obligations and IHL obligations appears to be lacking with respect to non-CT-related UN sanctions. As will be discussed in this paper, this leads to questions regarding the application of the so-called “supremacy clause” contained in Article 103 of the UN Charter vis-à-vis IHL obligations.

Prosecuting the Nexus between Terrorism, Conflict-related Sexual Violence and Trafficking in Human Beings before National Legal Mechanisms

Abstract United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 2331 (2016) recognizes that ‘acts of sexual and gender-based violence, including when associated to trafficking in persons, are known to be part of the strategic objectives and ideology of certain terrorist groups, used as a tactic of terrorism and an instrument to increase their finances and their power through recruitment and the destruction of communities’. In the same resolution, the Council noted that such trafficking, particularly of women and girls, ‘remains a critical component of the financial flows to certain terrorist groups’ and is ‘used by these groups as a driver for recruitment’. Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab are among the main terrorist groups that have used human trafficking (including for sexual exploitation) and conflict-related sexual violence as tactics of terrorism, or ‘sexual terrorism’. This article will: (i) explain the nexus between these three crimes; (ii) focus on its different manifestations in the context of these terrorist organizations; and (iii) reflect on the possibilities for national criminal prosecution. To assist in the fight against impunity and increase accountability, this article provides suggestions to facilitate the successful prosecution of sexual terrorism in a more survivor-centric way.

Counter-Terrorism Framework and Individual Liberties in Ghana

Does the flow of legislation arising from the United Nations Security Council's Resolution 1373 framework create rule-of-law and other issues of liberty for individuals in emerging democracies? This article examines the surveillance and other counter-terrorism laws created by Ghana, a Member State of the United Nations, in response to its international law obligation to combat terrorism. The article finds that significant tension exists between the government's attempt to implement legislation for the detection and suppression of terrorist acts and the rule of law and the enjoyment of individual freedoms and liberties in Ghana.

Marking failure, making space: feminist interventions in Security Council policy

Abstract Feminist interventions in international politics are, more often than not, understood (and visible) as interventions in relation to policy documents. These policies—in this case the United Nations Security Council's resolutions on Women, Peace and Security—often feature as the end point of feminist advocacy efforts or as the starting point for feminist analysis and critique. In this article the author responds to the provocations throughout Marysia Zalewski's work to think (and tell) the spaces of international politics differently, in this case by working with the concept of feminist failure as it is produced in feminist policy critique. Inspired by Zalewski's Feminist International Relations: exquisite corpse, the article explores the material and imaginary spaces in which both policies and critique are produced. It picks up and reflects upon a narrative refrain recognizable in feminist critiques on Women, Peace and Security policy—that we must not make war safe for women—as a way to reflect on the inevitability of failure and the ostensible boundaries between theory and practice. The author takes permission from Zalewski's creative interventions and her recognition of the value of the ‘detritus of the everyday’—here a walk from New York's Grand Central Station to the UN Headquarters, musings on the flash of a particular shade of blue, and the contents of a footnoted acknowledgement, begin to trace an international political space that is produced through embodied and quotidian practice.

Regional Organizations and Responsibility to Protect: Normative Reframing or Normative Change?

The adoption of the principle of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) by all United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) member states in 2005, and its reaffirmation in dozens of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions, indicate that there is a growing consensus around the world that egregious human rights violations necessitate a cooperative and decisive international response. But just as the political debates raged surrounding the precise articulation of RtoP between 2001 and 2005, so too goes the contemporary debate surrounding the implementation of RtoP. Regional divergences in RtoP implementation, in particular, have been noted by many scholars, as regional organizations implement those elements of RtoP that best suit their policy goals. This paper will apply recent scholarship on norm-lifecycles, specifically on “norm localization” to the operationalization of RtoP by regional organizations. We seek to explore regional divergences on RtoP implementation between the European Union (EU), League of Arab States (LAS), and the African Union (AU) on Libya and Syria. From this assessment, three main arguments will be put forward: (1) regional organizations remain politicized, reframing RtoP in divergent ways that dilute the strength of the norm, (2) politicization of the RtoP discourse constrains regional norm localization processes, (3) politicization and reframing of RtoP inhibit regional normative change and limit the potential for timely and decisive responses to protect civilians.

Canada’s Sanctions Regime Regarding Iran: How Much has Changed in a Post-Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Regulated Market?

The negotiation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (‘JCPOA’) further to the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Resolution of 20 July 20151 (‘July 2015 UNSC resolution endorsing the JCPOA’) portends, on full implementation, several significant changes affecting commercial and financial transactions in and with Iran.2 However, for anyone in Canada and Canadians abroad, the question is whether the JCPOA will result in a repositioning of Canadian sanctions compliance regarding Iran to respond to this evolving Iran sanctions regime. This article will explain that although there will be changes to Canada’s sanctions regime for Iran, most of the current sanctions regime will remain in place now and that for most business in Canada the status quo will prevail for the foreseeable future. This article discusses why. But before doing so, it is important to note that Canadian regulators can seek and in fact have sought criminal sanctions including incarceration for violations of Canada’s sanctions laws on Iran.

The enforcement problem in Resolution 2094 and the United Nations Security Council sanctions regime: sanctioning North Korea

ABSTRACTThis article deconstructs United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2094 through the preambulatory statements, objectives, obligations, and implementation and enforcement provisions of UNSC Resolution 2094. The article proceeds in three parts. First, it reviews the academic literature on UNSC sanctions and their application in the North Korean case. Second, it deconstructs UNSC Resolution 2094 according to the common structural components of international legal instruments to assess the level of congruence between the objectives of UNSC Resolution 2094, its enforcement mechanisms and outcomes. Third, it explores the weaknesses of UNSC Resolution 2094, focusing on the gap between the objectives and enforcement mechanisms found in the resolution. The inability of the UNSC sanctions regime to prevent North Korea reaching the cusp of becoming a nuclear weapons power is evidence of the international community's weak leverage over Pyongyang, a situation arising from the vulnerability of South Korea to a North Korean attack and the cross-cutting strategic priorities of China; the absence of economic linkages between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the primary sanctions-sender state in the USA; and North Korea's commitment to a nuclear weapons capability as the foundation of its medium-term economic development strategy, its institutional governance structure and associated ideological commitments.

Interview with Lieutenant General Babacar Gaye

The spectrum of peacekeeping operations has grown increasingly broad and has come to include various – and sometimes simultaneous – dimensions, such as conflict prevention, peacekeeping, peacemaking, peace enforcement and peacebuilding. With the ascendancy of more robust peacekeeping mandates, such as the one assigned by United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 2098 to the UN Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), there is a need to analyse thoroughly the complexity of the contexts in which peacekeepers are deployed today, the rules applicable to their engagement, and the modalities they can introduce to adapt to new realities. In this interview, the Review sought the opinion of a distinguished military commander and strategist on the future evolution of peacekeeping missions.Lieutenant General Babacar Gaye has been the serving UN Military Adviser for Peacekeeping Operations and Head of the Office of Military Affairs for the past three years. He has exercised command responsibilities at all levels of the military hierarchy and has been among the privileged officers to lead the Senegalese military. Besides his participation in Operation Fode Kaba II in Gambia and the conduct of several campaigns in Casamance, Senegal, General Gaye has taken part in UN operations in Sinai, Lebanon, and Kuwait, where he commanded the Senegalese battalion during Operation Desert Storm. His experience also includes a tour of duty of more than five years in the Democratic Republic of the Congo as MONUC/MONUSCO Force Commander. Prior to that, he served as Ambassador of the Republic of Senegal to Germany, Austria, and the organs of the UN in Vienna. General Officer of the Armoured Cavalry branch, General Gaye is a graduate of the prestigious Saint-Cyr military academy and the Ecole Supérieure de Guerre of France.

Judicial Review of Measures Implementing Security Council Resolutions: The Relevance of the EU Principle of Loyal Cooperation

AbstractIn recent years, the question of whether, and to what extent, measures implementing United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolutions can be subject to judicial review has stirred heated debates. This contribution takes a fresh look at the question in the context of the EU’s implementation of a series of Security Council Resolutions relating to the fight against terrorism using the well-established EU principle of loyal cooperation. It suggests that the principle could play a role in determining the appropriate standard and intensity of judicial review, and considers the value of approaching the question in that way.

Judicial Review of Measures Implementing Security Council Resolutions: The Relevance of the EU Principle of Loyal Cooperation

AbstractIn recent years, the question of whether, and to what extent, measures implementing United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolutions can be subject to judicial review has stirred heated debates. This contribution takes a fresh look at the question in the context of the EU’s implementation of a series of Security Council Resolutions relating to the fight against terrorism using the well-established EU principle of loyal cooperation. It suggests that the principle could play a role in determining the appropriate standard and intensity of judicial review, and considers the value of approaching the question in that way.

Libya and Resolution 1973: The Law of Politics

This paper analyzes recent developments in the intervention in Libya from the perspective of international relations and international law. The evidence suggests that states decided to intervene in Libya prior to sanction from the United Nations Security Council's Resolution 1973. The implication from the Libyan example is that politics was the impetus for the formulation and implementation of law, and not the other way around. Law happens in a context, and this context is shaped and bounded by international politics. This article is intended to invigorate further research into how international politics influences the creation, interpretation, and application of international law. This article is available in Journal of Strategic Security: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jss/vol5/iss2/11 Journal of Strategic Security Volume 5 Issue 2 2012, pp. 105-112 DOI: 10.5038/1944-0472.5.2.6 Journal of Strategic Security (c) 2012 ISSN: 1944-0464 eISSN: 1944-0472 105 Libya and Resolution 1973: The Law of Politics Monica Naime Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (Geneva)

All Necessary Means to Protect Civilians: What the Intervention in Libya Says About the Relationship Between the Jus in Bello and the Jus ad Bellum

This article scrutinizes the phrase 'all necessary means to protect civilians under threat of attack', contained in the United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011) authorizing military force in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya). It assesses both the meaning of this phrase and the legal regime pursuant to the resolution. That regime challenges the teleological separation but concurrent application of the law on the use of force (the jus ad bellum), and the law applicable in international and non-international armed conflict [the jus in bello or international humanitarian law (IHL)]. Security Council Resolution 1973, and its understanding of the term 'civilian', should be read in accordance with other international law norms; prima facie conflict of the resolution with IHL on the issue of targeting can be resolved. The resolution was however ambiguous on when force can be used. It is suggested that Resolution 1973 required a demonstrable risk of indiscriminate attack to civilians, per se necessity and jus ad bellum proportionality, the latter exceeding IHL's concept of proportionality because of the specificity of the resolution's aim. In examining the concurrent application of the jus ad bellum and the jus in bello in the context of specific interventions in Libya, the criticism that some states contributing coalition forces overstretched their mandate is corroborated. A combination of the resolution's ambiguity and political considerations lie at the heart of that overstretch. In developing international law for analogous situations, the intervention is likely to exacerbate existing quarrels over future council action to protect civilians. Language: en

NATO’S INTERVENTION IN LIBYA: A GENUINE ACTION TO PROTECT A CIVILIAN POPULATION IN MORTAL DANGER OR AN INTERVENTION AIMED AT REGIME CHANGE?

The article considers the state of human rights in Libya and NATO operations from the perspective of jus ad bellum and in light of United Nations Security Council (UN SC) resolutions. It also takes into account other points connected to the use of force, such as rescue operations to save nationals of intervening States, the consistency of Italy’s participation in the hostilities with the Italian-Libyan Treaty of 2008 and duty of non-intervention, as well as the question of whether any room is left for neutrality after the SC resolutions. The use of force was authorised by the UN SC in order to protect civilians and the civilian population under threat of attack. NATO bombing went far beyond the SC authorisation however, and resulted in a change of regime. From the standpoint of humanitarian intervention, the Libyan conflict shows that the use of force for humanitarian purposes is not allowed without a SC authorisation and the “responsibility to protect” doctrine does not give third States the power to effect a complete substitution of the constituted government in its duty to protect its own population. The Libyan adventure can be seen to further demonstrate that humanitarian intervention cannot reach its objectives without a change in the regime in power in the targeted country. However, such regime change was not authorised by Resolution 1973.

Anti-terrorist Blacklisting in the European Union: The Influence of National Procedures on the Judgments of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities

The most prominent example of anti-terrorism measures is undoubtedly the freezing of funds of individuals or entities suspected of committing or supporting terrorist acts. The European Union (EU) implements United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolutions and maintains its own anti-terrorist blacklist. This article looks at fund-freezing decisions taken on the basis of both the UN sanctions regime and the autonomous EU sanctions regime and the resulting jurisprudence of the Community courts. Discussion of recent judgments of the Court of First Instance (CFI) in the Sison and OMPI cases, both concerning EU level sanctions, will illustrate that the underlying national procedures can have considerable influence on the Court’s judgments in this field. Central to the discussion will be the relevance of national procedures and judgments on the validity of blacklisting decisions and their review.

Women, Peace and Security: An Analysis of the National Action Plans Developed in Response to UN Security Council Resolution 1325

This research analyzes the 11 national action plans that were adopted between June 2005 and October 2008 as a response to the United Nations Security Council's Resolution 1325. Resolution 1325, one of the most important UN resolutions within the field of peace and security, was adopted unanimously on 31 October 2000. The resolution highlights the consequences of violent conflict on women and girls and the important role of women in peacebuilding and post-conflict processes. In 2002 and again in 2004, UN member states were invited to prepare national action plans in order to take strong steps towards the implementation of UNSCR 1325. This study examines the similarities and differences in the plans and compares the points identified in the plans to the relevant points in UNSCR 1325.

Combating nuclear terrorism in the age of nuclear renaissance: domestic implementation of international legal obligations in India

The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction has emerged as one of the topmost challenges of the 21st century. Because the threat of nuclear and radiological terrorism is of recent origin, the international nuclear regime built over the past half-century was considered quite inadequate to address these concerns. This prompted the international community to respond to this global security problem by creating new legal rules at the national level and to strengthen the existing instruments and institutions. It is in this context that this paper introduces and analyses the legal framework established by multilateral instruments and United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1540 against the backdrop of global nuclear renaissance. The aim of the paper is to examine and analyse the national implementation of the international legal obligations in the field of nuclear terrorism in India, a key player in the international nuclear debate.

Implementing Security Council Resolutions in Hong Kong: An Examination of the United Nations Sanctions Ordinance

The United Nations Sanctions Ordinance is the primary legal basis of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) for implementing the United Nations Security Council's resolutions. However, there are concerns that the Ordi- nance is potentially violating the separation of powers in its delegation of regu- lation-making authority to the executive. There are also criticisms against the expediency of the Ordinance as a mechanism for enforcing Security Council sanc- tions. Against this background, this paper attempts to examine the separation of powers doctrine, its place in HKSAR's constitutional system and its relevance to the Ordinance. On the issue of expediency, this paper focuses on the scope and speed of implementing the sanctions, and the human rights and criminal justice pro- blems it involves. For comparative purposes, references are to be made to the law of the USA, Canada and Singapore.

United Nations (U.N.) Security Council Resolution 1559 (2004) (The Situation in the Middle East)

United Nations (U.N.) Security Council Resolution 1559 (2004) (The Situation in the Middle East)