Advanced

FN:s säkerhetsråd - Problematiken kring beslutsfattande om militära interventioner i enbart humanitära syften

Tellenmark, Vanessa LU (2017) LAGF03 20171
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In order to fulfil its responsibilities, the Security Council can authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. When fulfilling its obligations, the Security Council is bound by the fundamental principles in the Charter of the United Nations, which set forth general rules for The Security Councils mandate.

The traditional belief is that the state sovereignty and principle of non-intervention prevents the Security Council from intervening in the internal affairs of states, regardless of the purpose. In order to intervene in military terms,... (More)
The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In order to fulfil its responsibilities, the Security Council can authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. When fulfilling its obligations, the Security Council is bound by the fundamental principles in the Charter of the United Nations, which set forth general rules for The Security Councils mandate.

The traditional belief is that the state sovereignty and principle of non-intervention prevents the Security Council from intervening in the internal affairs of states, regardless of the purpose. In order to intervene in military terms, the situation must be classified as a threat to international peace. As a result of the Security Council's wide interpretation of the Charter of the United Nations, members have been reluctant to classify a domestic conflict as a threat to the international peace. This has prevented the Security Council from intervening in domestic conflicts for humanitarian purposes, like in Rwanda 1994.

Another factor that affects the Security Council's ability to function effectively is the use of the veto by the permanent members. They have been given the power to unilaterally block the Security Council's decisions, which may affect its ability to fulfil its main responsibility. Recent changes in the international system have changed the view regarding the possibilities of intervening military for humanitarian purposes. But the new standards will not have any major impact unless they receive support from the permanent members. Ultimately, it will be up to them to decide whether the Security Council will manage to live up to its role as a guardian of international peace and security or not in the future.

This thesis examines the Security Council's ability to decide on military intervention for humanitarian purposes. This has been done from a legal development perspective and an international perspective. With the help of a legal-judicial method, the extent of the Security Council's mandate has been examined and the influence of the right of the veto on the Security Council's decision-making. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
FN:s säkerhetsråd har tillskrivits huvudansvaret för säkerställandet av världsfreden. För att uppfylla sitt ansvar har organet tillskrivits befogenhet att vidta militära åtgärder under kapitel VII Förenta Nationernas stadga (FN-stadgan). I sitt arbete begränsas säkerhetsrådet av de grundläggande principer som finns kodifierade i organisationens stadga. Dessa principer, mer konkret statssuveränitetsprincipen, det allmänna våldsförbudet och principen om icke-intervention, har av säkerhetsrådet tolkats som närmst absoluta. Det har fört med sig att militär intervention i enbart humanitära syften endast kunnat företas när säkerhetsrådet bedömt att situationen hotat den internationella freden och säkerheten. Medlemmarna har emellertid varit... (More)
FN:s säkerhetsråd har tillskrivits huvudansvaret för säkerställandet av världsfreden. För att uppfylla sitt ansvar har organet tillskrivits befogenhet att vidta militära åtgärder under kapitel VII Förenta Nationernas stadga (FN-stadgan). I sitt arbete begränsas säkerhetsrådet av de grundläggande principer som finns kodifierade i organisationens stadga. Dessa principer, mer konkret statssuveränitetsprincipen, det allmänna våldsförbudet och principen om icke-intervention, har av säkerhetsrådet tolkats som närmst absoluta. Det har fört med sig att militär intervention i enbart humanitära syften endast kunnat företas när säkerhetsrådet bedömt att situationen hotat den internationella freden och säkerheten. Medlemmarna har emellertid varit motvilliga till att klassificera en inomstatlig konflikt som ett internationellt hot eftersom statssuveräniteten ansetts vara okränkbar. Detta är en av faktorerna till att säkerhetsrådet har varit förhindrat att vidta effektiva åtgärder när civilbefolkningen, som under folkmordet i Rwanda 1994, behövt skyddas.

Ytterligare en faktor som påverkar säkerhetsrådets möjligheter till att fungera effektivt är de permanenta medlemmarnas vetorätt. De har givits befogenheten att ensidigt blockera säkerhetsrådets beslut och påverka organets möjligheter att uppfylla sitt huvudansvar.

De förändringar som på senare år ägt rum inom det internationella systemet har förändrat synen på de normer som legitimerar användandet av militärt våld inom världssamfundet. Men med säkerhetsrådets nuvarande konstruktion kommer de nya normerna inte få någon större genomslagskraft utan stöd från de permanenta medlemmarna. I slutändan blir det upp till dem att avgöra om säkerhetsrådet i framtiden ska klara leva upp till sin roll som garant för den internationella freden och säkerheten eller inte.

I uppsatsen behandlas säkerhetsråds möjligheter att besluta om militär intervention i enbart humanitära syften. Detta har gjorts ur ett rättsutvecklingsperspektiv samt internationellt perspektiv. Med hjälp av en rättsdogmatisk metod har omfattningen av säkerhetsrådets befogenheter utretts samt vetorättens påverkan på säkerhetsrådets beslutsfattande. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Tellenmark, Vanessa LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20171
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Folkrätt, FN:s säkerhetsråd, militära interventioner, humanitära syften
language
Swedish
id
8908548
date added to LUP
2017-07-01 18:00:40
date last changed
2017-07-01 18:00:40
@misc{8908548,
  abstract     = {The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In order to fulfil its responsibilities, the Security Council can authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. When fulfilling its obligations, the Security Council is bound by the fundamental principles in the Charter of the United Nations, which set forth general rules for The Security Councils mandate. 

The traditional belief is that the state sovereignty and principle of non-intervention prevents the Security Council from intervening in the internal affairs of states, regardless of the purpose. In order to intervene in military terms, the situation must be classified as a threat to international peace. As a result of the Security Council's wide interpretation of the Charter of the United Nations, members have been reluctant to classify a domestic conflict as a threat to the international peace. This has prevented the Security Council from intervening in domestic conflicts for humanitarian purposes, like in Rwanda 1994. 

Another factor that affects the Security Council's ability to function effectively is the use of the veto by the permanent members. They have been given the power to unilaterally block the Security Council's decisions, which may affect its ability to fulfil its main responsibility. Recent changes in the international system have changed the view regarding the possibilities of intervening military for humanitarian purposes. But the new standards will not have any major impact unless they receive support from the permanent members. Ultimately, it will be up to them to decide whether the Security Council will manage to live up to its role as a guardian of international peace and security or not in the future.

This thesis examines the Security Council's ability to decide on military intervention for humanitarian purposes. This has been done from a legal development perspective and an international perspective. With the help of a legal-judicial method, the extent of the Security Council's mandate has been examined and the influence of the right of the veto on the Security Council's decision-making.},
  author       = {Tellenmark, Vanessa},
  keyword      = {Folkrätt,FN:s säkerhetsråd,militära interventioner,humanitära syften},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {FN:s säkerhetsråd - Problematiken kring beslutsfattande om militära interventioner i enbart humanitära syften},
  year         = {2017},
}