International Law and Institutions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

International Law and Institutions - Essay modellingThe security department Council has primitive responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Since the 1990s not only has the Security Council agreed to authorize humanitarian intervention, there have also been interventions without authorization from the Security Council such as the intervention in Northern Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Haiti, Yugoslavia/Kosovo and East Timor. These latter interventions have arisen as a result of a perception of the Security Councils failure to act or ineffective action at law where there has been mention about the severe deprivation of human rights. For example, the failure of the UN to broker political peace in Somalia lead to the US Operation Restore Hope in 1992, which for the first time in American history, axiom American troops committed to a military operation for a cause completely misrelated to protecting their national interest. The operations goal was to circularise supply routes for food relief efforts and cultivate the way for a UN peacekeeping force to preserve the security of these routes. The challenge, it seems, mustiness be to leave open the option for humanitarian intervention in extreme cases of human suffering, where the reasons for action seem morally controlling and politically sound but the Security Council is unable to act, while at the same time to forefend jeopardising in a fundamental way the existing, hard-earned, international legal order, including the primeval role of the Security Council.... must be to leave open the option for humanitarian intervention in extreme cases of human suffering, where the reasons for action seem morally imperative and politically sound but the Security Council is unable to act, while at the same time to avoid jeopardising in a fundamental way the existing, hard-earned, international legal order, including the central role of the Security Council.1The Security Council is bound by the Charter. However as the US has cogently argued the Charter is excessively narrow. It envisaged only those situations where a state might call on the help of the international community or where international peace was threatened. It did not take into account the situations observed since then in the killing field of Cambodia, Rwanda and Srebrenica. In 2004, 10 years after the genocide in Rwanda, the Canadian Foreign Minister, Bill graham was reported by the BBC to have saidWe lack the political will to achieve the necessary stipulation on how to put in place the type of measures that will prevent a future Rwanda from happening2Although the primary responsibility lies with the state, where a population is suffering serious harm, as a result of internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure, and the state in question is unwilling or unable to halt or distract it, the principle of non-intervention should lead to a larger principle, that of the international responsibi lity to protect3. There are essentially 2 criticisms of the UN its relevance and its structure. As can be seen from the US ignoring the UN over Iraq and the UNs admission of failing to act in time to the obvious threat in Rwanda, there are many reasons for questioning its relevance. Its structure goes stake to 1945 where the victorious powers of World War II decided to stamp their