Цывкунова Интернатионал Лаw Учебно-методическое пособие 2010

The cooperative effort of the whole world. Those words ring even more true today, when it is not simply peace - but our very health and prosperity that we hold in common. Yet I also know that this body is made up of sovereign states. And sadly, but not surprisingly, this body has often become a forum for sowing discord instead of forging common ground; a venue for playing politics and exploiting grievances rather than solving problems. After all, it is easy to walk up to this podium and to point fingers and stoke division. Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anyone can do that.

Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demand more. In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional division between nations of the south and north makes no sense in an interconnected world. Nor do alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long gone Cold War.

The time has come to realize that the old habits and arguments are irrelevant to the challenges faced by our people. They lead nations to act in opposition to the very goals that they claim to pursue, and to vote - often in this body - against the interests of their own people. They build up walls between us and the future that our people seek, and the time has come for those walls to come down. Together, we must build new coalitions that bridge old divides - coalitions of different faiths and creeds; of north and south, east and west; black, white, and brown.

The choice is ours. We can be remembered as a generation that chose to drag the arguments of the 20th century into the 21st; that put off hard choices, refused to look ahead, and failed to keep pace because we defined ourselves by what we were against instead of what we were for. Or, we can be; that comes together to serve the common interests of human beings, and finally gives meaning to the promise embedded in the name given to this institution: the United Nations.

51

That is the future America wants - a future of peace and prosperity that we can only reach if we recognize that all nations have rights, but all nations have responsibilities as well. That is the bargain that makes this work. That must be the guiding principle of international cooperation.

•Express your opinion on the issue of “the cooperative effort of the whole world” in the 21st century.

•Comment on the following statements: “Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demand more...” “We can be a generation that chooses to see the shoreline beyond the rough waters ahead…”

It’s interesting to know

In an interview with Time magazine in the summer of 1955, Dag Hammarskjöld expressed his frustration over the UN’s public image. He worried, in particular, that many people considered the organization – at the time barely ten years old – as a bureaucratic monstrosity incapable of addressing the real concerns of real people.

Equally important, Hammarskjöld thought that such disaffection was distancing the UN from the very people it was designed to serve. There was but one solution.

As Hammarskjöld explained: “Everything will be all right – you know hen? When people, just people, stop thinking of the United Nations as a weird Picasso abstraction and see it as a drawing they made themselves.”

(From: Jussi M. Hanhimäki “The United Nations: A Very Short

Introduction”.)

52

Unit II. Section 3

The Structure of the United Nations

Task 1. Read the text about the United Nations organs paying special attention to the words and word combinations given in bold type.

Like all international organizations, the UN is composed of a number of organs. In addition, the UN system comprises a family of international organizations which share certain common institutions and practices.

Article 7 of the UN Charter identifies two types of organs within the United Nations: principal organs and subsidiary organs. Article 7(1) lists the six principal organs of the United Nations: the General Assembly; the Security Council; the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC); the Trusteeship Council; the International Court of Justice; and the Secretariat.

The structure and powers of each of these organs shall be discussed below. Article 7(2) provides that 'such subsidiary organs as may be found necessary may be established in accordance with the present Charter'. Whilst the list of principal organs is exhaustive and no additional organs may be established except by amendment of the Charter, subsidiary organs can always be created by the principal organs. Their lifespan is determined by the principal organ that has established them.

The powers, functions and composition of the principal organs are determined by the Charter, whilst those of subsidiary organs are determined by the principal organ that establishes them.

Subsidiary organs established by the General Assembly include the International Law Commission, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UNICEF, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the UN Administrative Tribunal (UNAT).

Subsidiary organs set up the Security Council include peace-keeping missions, Sanctions Committees, the International Criminal Tribunals

53

for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC).

In most cases, a principal organ will confer some of its powers on a subsidiary organ that it creates. However, a principal organ may be entitled to confer on the subsidiary organ powers which it does not itself possess where the power to establish such a subsidiary organ is necessary for the performance of the functions of the principal organ. Thus, both the General Assembly and the Security Council have established subsidiary organs that have judicial powers even though they themselves do not have such powers.

The Charter also refers to another type of body known as specialized agencies. Unlike the subsidiary organs, these are international organizations in their own right. They are established by separate treaties and brought into relationship with the UN by agreement (Articles 57 and 63). They operate in particular technical fields and, like the UN, are open organizations with worldwide membership and responsibilities.

Although they are independent international organizations, the UN Charter provides that the UN may coordinate their activities (Articles 57-60), principally through ECOSOC. In practice, coordination and cooperation are achieved through the United Nations System Chief Executives Board (CEB) for Coordination (formerly the Administrative Committee on Coordination) and its High Level Committees. Development assistance is coordinated by UNDP. In other words, the specialized agencies operate under the aegis of the United Nations.

Task 2. a) Find in the text the English equivalents for the following vocabulary items:

•главные органы ООН;

•вспомогательные органы;

•специализированные учреждения;

•в соответствии с чем-либо, согласно чему-либо;

•Совет по опеке;

54

•Международный уголовный трибунал по бывшей Югославии (МТБЮ);

•Программа ООН по окружающей среде;

•включать в себя, состоять из…;

•Детский фонд ООН;

•Управление комиссара ООН по правам беженцев;

•исчерпывающий;

•судебные полномочия;

•под эгидой ООН.

b)Name two types of organs within the United Nations. What are the key factors distinguishing the types? Give the examples of the subsidiary bodies set up by the General Assembly. Which subsidiary bodies did the Security Council establish?

Task 3. What do the abbreviations of the following specialized agencies stand for? What fields do these organizations operate in?

ILO ______________________	IMF _____________________
ICAO ____________________	FAO ____________________
IMO______________________	UPU ____________________
WMO ____________________	UNESCO ________________
UNIDO ___________________	WHO ____________________
WIPO ____________________	UNWTO _________________

Task 4. Focus on the General Assembly.

a)Watch the video about the UN General Assembly.

b)Read the following test about the composition, voting procedure and competence of the UNGA paying special attention to the words and expressions in bold type.

c)Sum up the information about the UNGA.

55

The General Assembly is the plenary organ of the United Nations and is the only principal organ composed of all member States (Article 9). It is a deliberative not a legislative body and unlike the Security Council, is not in permanent session but meets annually in regular sessions which usually take place between September and December (Article 20).

It may also meet in special session outside its regular sessions. At its regular sessions, agenda items are allocated to one of the six main committees, where substantive discussion and decision-taking occurs:

•First Committee (Disarmament and International Security);

•Second Committee (Economic and Financial);

•Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural);

•Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization);

•Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary);

•Sixth Committee (Legal).

The Assembly has competence to discuss and make recommendations upon the very broad range of matters falling within the scope of Charter (Article 10). However, it can only make binding decisions on internal administrative matters.

Articles 11-17 of the Charter specifically provide that General Assembly has competence with regard to peace and security, promoting human rights, and international cooperation in political, economic, social, cultural, educational, and health fields. However, the Assembly may not make recommendations concerning disputes or situations in respect of which the Security Council is exercising its functions unless requested to do so by the Council (Article 12) and, together with UN as a whole, it may not intervene 'in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State' (Article 2(7)).

Voting in the Assembly is on the basis of one member one vote. Decisions on important questions must be adopted by two thirds of members present and voting. There is a non-exhaustive list of such important questions. Other decisions are to be taken by simple majority (Article 18).

56

Task 5. Read the following extracts from the book of Jussi M. Hanhimäki “The United Nations: A Very Short Introduction”. Express your opinion on the question of effectiveness of such a forum as the UNGA.

…Each member state, regardless of its size, has one vote. This arrangement seems to make the GA much alike the U.S. Senate, where each of the fifty states is represented by two senators regardless of the size of the population or landmass of a given state. The situation is in some ways absurd: the tiny island of Tuvalu with its 11,6000 citizens has equal representation with the People’s Republic of China and India, each with more than 1 billion.

…The very size of the GA means that its effectiveness is limited. The annual meetings – or regular sessions – that usually open in September have become ritualistic and tend to make news only in connection with a possible high-profile appearance, by the U.S. president, for instance.

…Its very inclusiveness is the GA’s – and in a nutshell the UN’s – greatest weakness: with so many members represented, contentious issues have little chance of being affirmatively decided.

…In many ways, the General Assembly functions like a national parliament. It has a president and twenty-one (!) vice presidents.

Task 6. Focus on the Security Council.

a)Watch the video about the Security Council.

b)Read the following test about the composition, voting procedure and competence of the Security Council paying special attention to the words and expressions in bold type.

c)What is meant by mediation and good offices?

d)Sum up the information about the UNSC.

The Security Council is composed of 15 member States of the UN. There are five permanent members of the Council (USA, Russia, UK,

57

France and China) and 10 which are elected by the Assembly for twoyear terms (Article 23).

Its competence is mainly (though not exclusively) limited to issues concerning the maintenance of international peace and security, for which it bears primary responsibility within the UN system (Article 24).

Although each member has one vote, decisions on non-procedural matters must be adopted by the affirmative vote of nine members and include the concurring vote of the permanent members who therefore possess a veto with respect to substantive decisions. Abstentions, however, are not deemed to be vetoes. It suffices here to note that the Council has the power to adopt decisions which are binding on members of the UN (Articles 24 and 25).

When a complaint concerning a threat to peace is brought before it, the Council's first action is to recommend the parties to reach agreement by peaceful means. In some cases, the Council itself undertakes investigation and mediation. It may dispatch a mission, appoint special representatives or request the Secretary General to use his good offices.

When a dispute leads to fighting, the Council's first concern is to bring it to an end as soon as possible. The Council may issue ceasefire directives, dispatch military observers or a peacekeeping force to help reduce tensions. Under Chapter VII of the Charter, the Council may decide on enforcement measures, including economic sanctions, arms embargoes or collective military action.

Task 7. Choose one of the topics and make reports:

•The Economic and Social Council: composition, functions, recent events.

•The Secretariat.

•The Trusteeship Council.

•The UN operating budget.

Task 8. Focus on Enforcement measures: Sanctions.

58

a) Read the article “Sanctions punish and inflame the innocent.” (Andrew Reding wrote this article for Pacific News Service in 2002.)

Developments in Palestine, Iraq, and Haiti are again demonstrating that economic sanctions and other forms of collective punishment are at best counterproductive and at worst often more murderous than military strikes.

Remember when a schoolteacher would punish the whole class for the misbehavior of one or two anonymous students? Did it work? If your experience was like mine, most of the time it did not.

The misbehavers were usually among the more aggressive and popular students. They were not about to incriminate themselves. And usually no one else wanted to turn them in, because that would be “ratting” and could lead to being beaten up. The outcome was that everyone ended up hating the teacher.

Collective punishment is no more effective when exercised against entire nations. Yet that is exactly the approach being taken by the United Nations, the United States and Israel against “terrorists” and “rogue states,” with equally dubious results.

When Israel responds to suicide bombings by rolling tanks into major Palestinian cities and imposing round-the-clock curfews, it antagonizes the entire population. All residents — regardless of political sympathies — are barred from going to work or even obtaining food and medical care.

The Palestinian middle class, Israel’s best hope for moderation, is being thrust into poverty. Even when such operations yield a handful of “terrorists,” their overall effect is to generate far greater numbers of recruits to extremist causes and a new round of suicide bombings.

Though justified in the name of “security,” collective punishments only lead to greater insecurity.

59

U.N. economic sanctions against Iraq have proven equally ineffective. They have failed to compel Saddam Hussein to allow inspections of sites where weapons of mass destruction may be stored or under development. Instead, the most devastating impact has been on Iraqi children.

Resigning his post in 1998, the head of the United Nations’ humanitarian workers in Iraq said that sanctions “are starving to death 6,000 Iraqi infants every month, ignoring the human rights of ordinary Iraqis and turning a whole generation against the West.” The sanctions were recently fine-tuned, but that has neither improved their effectiveness, nor altogether eliminated the harm done to ordinary Iraqis.

For several years, the United States and European countries have been withholding economic aid from Haiti, in an effort to compel President Jean-Bertrand Aristide to privatize state-owned utilities and to strike a deal with his political adversaries. Yet there is no sign that either Aristide or his opposition are any more ready to compromise now than before.

The people paying the price are — once again — the innocent. In desperation, some Haitians are now eating clay seasoned in bouillon. Polio is reappearing. In the slums, teenagers lie on sheets spread over concrete porches, dying of tuberculosis.

The justification for economic sanctions and aid boycotts is that they are more humane than military actions. But as Americans should realize after four decades of the Cuban embargo, they do not work.

And, as Iraqis are quick to point out, even the much-publicized “collateral damage” of modern “smart” weaponry has proved to be a lot less destructive to civilian populations than economic sanctions.

South Africa is often cited as a case where economic sanctions worked. But other factors helped bring down Apartheid, including diplomatic isolation, splits among whites and between whites and South Asians, a growing threat from guerrilla bases harbored by neighboring countries,

60