Thursday 30 November 2017

THE UNITED NATIONS PLAN FOR NAMIBIAN INDEPENDENCE

Davinder Kaur November 30, 2017 0 Comments

THE UNITED NATIONS PLAN FOR NAMIBIAN INDEPENDENCE

When the Security Council in 1976 demanded free elections under the supervision and control of United Nations, it declared that adequate time was required to enable the UN to establish the necessary machinery for the elections in Namibia and to permit the Namibian people to organise themselves politically, In 1978, a proposal for the settlement of the question of Namibia was submitted to the Council by five of its members-Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. According to the proposal, elections for a Constituent Assembly would be held under UN auspices. Every stage of the electoral process would be conducted to the satisfaction of a Special Representative for Namibia appointed by the Secretary-General. A United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) would be at the disposal of the Special Representative to help him supervise the political process and to ensure that all parties observed all provisions of an agreed solution. The Group was to be composed of both military and civilian personnel.

The Security Council then adopted resolutions 431 (1978) of 27 July 1978 and 435 (1978) of 29 September 1978. Under resolution 431, the Council requested the Secretary-General to appoint a Special Representative for Namibia and to submit recommendations for the implementation of the settlement proposal. The Secretary~General recommended implementation in stage: all hostile activities would cease and armed forces would be withdrawn, restricted or demobilised; discriminatory laws would be repealed, political prisoners released, and exiles allowed to return; free and fair elections would be conducted, monitored by the UN and independence would be achieved with the adoption of a Constituent Assembly, and its entry into force. By resolution 435, the Council endorsed the UN plan for Namibia and decided to establish UNTAG.

In 1980, the South African Government accepted the plan proposed by the five powers and subsequently participated in a pre-implementation meeting held at Geneva in January 1981. However, South Africa did not agree to proceed towards a ceasefire, one of the conditions set by the UN for the implementation of Council resolution 435. Implementation negotiations were again stalled when South Africa attached new conditions which the UN did not accept, in particular the one which linked the independence of Namibia with the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola.

The Secretary-General reported in March 1987 that all outstanding issues relevant to the UN plan, including the choice of an electoral system, had been resolved. Only the precondition linking independence to troop withdrawal remained an obstacle to implementation. The Secretary-General expressed the view that South Africa should urgently reconsider its position to enable the UN to proceed with the implementation of resolution 435.

On December 22, 1988, ten years after the adoption of resolution 435, a tripartite agreement among Angola, Cuba and South Africa, mediated by the United States, was signed at United Nations Headquarters in New York. The agreement committed the signatory states to a series of measures necessary to achieve peace in the region and opened the way to the independence of Namibia in accordance with the UN plan. A bilateral agreement between Angola and Cuba was signed at the same time. In accordance with a stipulation in this agreement, the UN dispatched an observer mission the United Nations Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM) to Angola to verify the redeployment northward, and phased withdrawal, of Cuban troops. The parties recommended to the Secretary-General that implementation of resolution 435 should begin on April 1, 1989.. On January 16,1989, the Security Council affirmed that date, and on February 16, the Council called for the implementation of resolution 435 in its original and definitive form. This action enabled the Secretary-General to set up the UNTAG operation in Namibia and to proceed with the UN independence plan.

UNTAG was designed to function under the authority of the Security Council, as envisaged in resolution 435, to assist in the supervision and control of free and fair elections in Namibia for a Constituent Assembly. The military component was placed under the command of the UN vested in the Secretary-General. Its duties included monitoring the ceasefire, monitoring the withdrawal, restriction to base and demobilisation of forces and assisting the civilian component in the discharge of its tasks. In 1978, the Security Council accepted the Secretary-General’s judgement that a maximum of 7,500 military personnel provided by member states should be mandated to perform the tasks assigned to UNTAG. The actual number would depend on the prevailing political situation in the area, which the Secretary-General would keep under constant review. In its resolution 632 (1989) of February 16, 1989, the Security Council fixed the number of military personnel for .initial deployment at 4,650.

Implementation of Security Council resolution 435 began on April 1,1989. More than 20 countries contributed military and police personnel. When civilian support staff were counted, it was found that about 109 nationalities were represented in the UNTAG operation.

On May 24, 1989, members of the Security Council issued a statement reaffirming the role and authority of the Council as the international body responsible for putting the UN plan into effect, and expressed their strong support for the Secretary-General in

his efforts to implement the mandate. The Secretary-General paid an official visit to Namibia from July 18 to 21,1989.

The Security Council assigned to UNTAG one of the most complex operations undertaken by the United Nations since its founding, and because of its combined military and civilian components, it stands as a unique experience in the history of UN Operations.

Tuesday 28 November 2017

THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON DECOLONISATION

Davinder Kaur November 28, 2017 0 Comments

The Special Committee on Decolonisation

The declaration on decolonisation provided a framework for the General Assembly to pay attention to progress achieved towards ending the subjugation of peoples. A body entitled Special Committee on the Situation with Regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on Decolonisation (Committee of 24) has become the main body concerned with self-determination and is engaged in the problems of few remaining non-self-governing areas.

From the beginning, non-administering governments have dominated the Committee of 24. The administering powers smarting under constant criticism, gradually left the Committee. The first to leave it were Italy and Australia, followed by the United Kingdom and the United States which complained of the ”militant attitude" of the majority. Since 1971, not a single administering state is a member of the Committee of 24.

As the number of dependent territories declined, the behaviour of the Committee and the tone of its debates sharpened increasingly. It took a especially hard line on the remaining major colonial areas, such as Rhodesia, the Portuguese colonies in Africa, and Namibia. It also has demanded full independence for the dozens of dependent islands and archipelagos existing in many parts of the world, no matter how small their populations or how benign their governors. To carry out its tasks, the Committee of 24 has taken some cues from the provisions of the Trusteeship system and added some of its own innovations. It receives petitions and offers forums to people from the non-self-governing territories. It tries to send visiting missions to the territories, but the administering authorities have not always allowed them permission to do so. The Committee issues periodic reports and makes recommendations to the administering states. These recommendations sometimes criticise them strongly and demand adoption of specific methods intended to fix a date for independence.

DECOLONISATION

The General Assembly and Decolonisation

The first step towards establishing UN responsibility for all dependent territories was taken in 1946 with the formation of a Committee on Information from non-self-governing territories. On the basis of information given by the administering powers, it was to make recommendations to the Assembly. This committee was modelled on the Trusteeship Council which had an equal number of administering and non-administering powers. Like the Trusteeship Council, the Committee prepared a questionnaire to guide its members in reporting.

This committee had a very limited effectiveness in the UN’ 5 struggle against colonialism for two reasons. It was debarred from examining ”political" information, and was not given the right to accept petitions or send out visiting missions to the dependent territories. As a result, the anti-colonial initiative remained largely with the General Assembly and its Fourth Committee, which soon requested governments to include political information in their annual reports. Later, the Assembly began to demand that the administering authorities should submit sufficient information on constitutional changes in the territories to enable it to determine whether self-government had in fact been attained. Spain and Portugal after joining the UN in 1955, initially resisted the idea of transmitting information to the UN about their overseas dominions. Following UN pressure Spain agreed to do so in 1960 but Portugal refused to follow suit.

By 1960, the anti-colonial revolution was at its peak. Four decades of mandate and trusteeship had established the principle of international accountability for the administration of a select group of territories, with independence as the ultimate aim. Fifteen years of gradually expanding activity under the Charter Declaration regarding non-self-governing territories had gone far in establishing the principle of international accountability for the well-being and self-government of ex-colonial states. With a Third World majority dominating the UN world body, the Assembly was well on its way to becoming an aggressive instrument in the drive against whatever remained of colonialism in different parts of the world. In a historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, the General Assembly proclaimed that the subjection of any people to alien domination was a denial of fundamental human rights contrary to the UN Charter and an impediment to world peace, and that all subject peoples had a right to immediate and complete independence. This was a historic declaration and a landmark in the UN role in decolonisation and provided a rationale to all peoples in dependent territories to overthrow their colonial masters.

In 1961 the Assembly expanded the role of the Committee on Information by authorising it to discuss political information and to make recommendations specifically directed at the problems of territories located in the same region. The Fourth Committee also broke new ground by granting, for the first time, a hearing to petitioners from two non-self-governing territories.

However, what was far more important was the creation of a special committee on the situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. Known as the Committee of 17 (increased to 25 in 1979) it was assigned the task of studying the Declaration and making appropriate recommendations for its implementation. The Special Committee had an anti-colonial majority (of membership) and a broad mandate to do whatever it thought was appropriate to implement the 1960 Declaration. The Committee assumed to itself all the powers of the Trusteeship Council, such as the powers to hear petitions, send missions to the field and make recommendations directed at specific territories. By 1963 the earlier Committee on Information was formally abolished.

Rhodesia, Namibia and the Portuguese African colonies of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea were some of the problem areas standing in the way of the UN efforts at decolonisation. Rhodesia’s White minority government unilaterally declared independence from Britain in 1965 and endured 15 years of international ostracism, UN economic sanctions, and internal strife before finally accepting majority rule in 1980 and receiving . admission to the UN as the State of Zimbabwe. Portugal's ha rd-line policy collapsed in 1974 under the weight of colonial wars that ate away nearly half of the country’s revenues and after the fall of the Galtano dictatorship Portuguese Guinea (now Guinea-Bisseau) became independent in 1974. Mozambique and Angola followed suit in 1975. Namibia, despite South Aftrica’s persistent efforts to hold on to it,‘ finally got its independence in 1990. The decolonisation efforts of the UN can be called its crowning success. Independence has become not merely a goal but an accomplished fact for the vast majority of colonial peoples since 1945. We shall now examine the case of Namibia to give an example of the kind of role the UN has played with regard to decolonisation.

Sunday 26 November 2017

UN Journey From Trusteeship to Independence

Davinder Kaur November 26, 2017 0 Comments

UN Journey From Trusteeship to Independence

The elaborate Trusteeship system reached full bloom in a period of about 15 years, from 1948 to 1963. By the end of 1949, the General Assembly had approved 11 trust agreements. All of them have since achieved independence. The Trusteeship Council and the General Assembly have tried to encourage the decolonisation process by repeatedly urging that target dates be set for independence. The Trusteeship Council has since formally suspended its operation.

Till recently the only remaining Trust Territory in the Pacific . (Micronesia) were three groups of islands: the Marshalls, the Carolines and the Marianas. They were formerly German territories that were placed under Japanese administration after World War I. The United States took over their administration after the defeat of Japan in World War II.

introduction of independent trusteeship with the pan group

On December 23, 1990, the Security Council voted overwhelmingly to dissolve the 43-year-old UN trusteeship over the strategic Northern Marianas, Marshall Islands and Micronesia.

The federated States of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands pressed for termination so that their Governments would become more independent and gain worldwide diplomatic recognition, especially from Great Britain and Europe. The two semi independent nations have diplomatic ties with several South Pacific countries and china .

Palau, the only remaining entity under UN Trusteeship gained independence in December, 1994.

Other Non-Self-Governing Territories

The elaborate provisions of the Trusteeship system applied to only a few dependent territories. The vast majority of colonial and similar lands were related to the United Nations through less far. reaching arrangements spelled out in Chapter XI than was required under the Trusteeship system. Nevertheless, one provision of the Charter, Article 73(e), opened the way for the General Assembly to concentrate on colonial situations. Under this article, governments administering non-self-governing territories submit reports that can become the basis for criticism, suggestion and comment. In a series of resolutions, the General Assembly established a procedure and specified what the reports should contain. Despite opposition from some of the colonial powers, it also insisted that it had the right to examine the reports and make recommendations about them. It has done so with great vigour, whatever the wishes of the administering powers. Moreover, the General Assembly claims the right to decide when the duty to transmit reports on a given territory ends, which is equivalent to deciding when a territory become self governing.

As early as 1948, the General Assembly clearly implied that the end of colonialism ought to be hastened. It set up a committee to examine in detail, reports on the economic, social and educational situation in the non-self-governing areas and to report its findings. Five years later, the General Assembly made its aims more explicit. The committee was instructed to try to develop moral and civic consciousness among the subject peoples and enable them to accept more responsibility in conducting their own affairs, to raise the standards of living by helping them to improve economic productivity and health, to promote social progress, taking into account basic cultural values, and to extend the intellectual development of the peoples of the regions.

While information on colonies steadily arrived at the office of the Secretary-General, some administering states, such as Portugal and for a time France, claimed that their overseas territories were an integral part of their states and therefore not covered by the reporting requirement. Against this background,

the General Assembly studied the principles that should guide members in deciding whether or not an obligation to transmit information existed. In 1960, it decided that, on the face of it, information had to be submitted about any territory that was geographically separate and distinct, ethnically or culturally, from the administering state.

Declaration on Granting of Independence

Altogether, 30 former non-self-governing and trust territories became independent between 1945 and 1960. The African and Asian states became increasingly impatient about setting dates for the independence of the remaining territories. This led to the General Assembly adopting in 1960, a ”Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples’ (Resolution 1514 (XV )). This rather lengthy document proclaimec the need to end colonialism quickly. It claimed that alien subjugation of people denied human rights to them and violated the UN Charter. It demanded immediate steps to transfer powe to the people of non-self-governing territories on the basis of th right of self-determination. It also directed its fire against an attempt to disrupt the national unity of the territories, through policy of ”divide and rule” by the colonial powers.

Saturday 25 November 2017

THE TRUSTEESHIP SYSTEM

Davinder Kaur November 25, 2017 0 Comments

THE TRUSTEESHIP SYSTEM

The decolonisation efforts of the United Nations derive from the Charter principle of ”equal rights and self~determination of peoples”, as well as from three specific chapters in the Charter -XI (Non-self-governing Territories), X11 and XIII (Trusteeship Areas) devoted to the interests of dependent peoples. Since 1960, the UN has also been guided by the General Assembly’s Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples [Resolution 1514 (XV)], by which member states proclaimed the necessity of bringing colonialism to a speedy end.

The UN Trusteeship system under Art. 77 took over from the League of Nations mandate system, assuming responsibility for the remaining territories that had not reached independence.Under Chapter XII of the Charter, the UN established the International Trusteeship System for the supervision of Trust Territories placed under it by individual agreements with the states administering them. The system applied to (i) territories then held under mandates established by the League of Nations after World War 1, (ii) territories detached from enemy states as a result of World War II, and (iii) territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration. Under Art. 76 the system was intended to promote the political, economic, social and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the Trust Territories and their progressive development towards self-government or independence, as appropriate to the situation in the lands, based on the freely expressed wishes of the people concerned.

Supervision over the Trust Territories was sought to be exercised by the Trusteeship Council, which was to report ultimately to the General Assembly. The administration of each territory was governed by a trusteeship agreement with the administering power. The system provided for a distinction between ordinary territories and Strategic Trust Territories. The latter category was created at the insistence of the US Navy, which wanted to use the islands in the Pacific Ocean that Japan had governed for its own military purposes. The administering powers of all ordinary territories report to the Trusteeship Council on their operations, but reports on Strategic Trust Territories go to the Security Council. The Council, where action requires concurrence of the Great Powers, exercises all functions regarding the Strategic Trust Territories, including approval of agreements. Only US-administered islands were designated as Strategic Trust Territories.

Two of the former mandated territories of the days of the League of Nations never became part of the Trusteeship system. The British mandate of Palestine was excluded because of the dispute between the Jewish and Arab populations that led to the establishment of Israel in 1948. The other territory is Southwest Africa, or Namibia as it is now called. Administered by South Africa as an integral part of its territory, Namibia has been the subject of a continuing dispute since 1946, and no agreement could be reached to incorporate it in the system.

The Trusteeship Council has a special composition that tries to balance the self-interest of administering powers with the notion of a ”sacred trust” with regard to non-self-governing peoples. Therefore, it consists of an equal number of administering and non-administering powers (Art. 86 of the UN Charter). But, in any case, it includes the permanent members of the Security Council (some of which did not administer territories). The Council Considers reports submitted by the administering states, accepts and examines petitions from the inhabitants of the Trust Territories, and decides on whether progress has been made towards the goals of the system.

A special power, far beyond anything known in the League system, allows the Council to send visiting missions to the territories; in practice, each of them received such a mission, which observed the situation and interviewed officials and inhabitants, about every three years. The administering powers are usually states, but in one instance the UN itself served as an administering power. This unusual situation grew out of the transfer of New Guinea (West Irian) from Dutch to Indonesian sovereignty in 1962. For several months, the UN governed the territory, serving as an intermediary in the transfer process. But now it is impossible to compose the Trusteeship Council according to the required balance, because very few territories are under administration in accordance with trust agreements.

Wednesday 22 November 2017

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

Davinder Kaur November 22, 2017 0 Comments

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

The Economic and Social Council was established by the Charter as the principal organ to coordinate the economic and social work of the United Nations and the specialised agencies and institutions-known as the ”United Nations family” of organisations.

The Council has 54 members Who serve for three years, 18 being elected each year for a three-year term to replace 18 members Whose three-year term has expired.

Voting in the Economic and Social Council is by simple majority, each member has one vote.

Charter Role

The functions and powers of the Economic and Social Council are:

To serve as the central forum for the discussion of international economic and social issues of a global or interdisciplinary nature and the formulation of policy recommendations on those issues addressed to member states and to the United Nations system as a whole;
To make or initiate studies and reports and make recommendations on international economic, social, cultural, educational, health and related matters;
To promote respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all;
To call international conferences and prepare draft conventions for submission to the General Assembly on matters falling Within its competence
To negotiate agreements with the specialised agencies defining their relationship with the United Nations
To coordinate the activities of the specialised agencies by means of consultations with and recommendations to them, and by means of recommendations to the General Assembly and the Members of the United Nations;
To perform services, approved by the Assembly, for Members of the United Nations and, upon request, for the specialised agencies;
To consult with non-governmental organisations concerned, on matters with which the Council deals.

Sessions

structure of social and economic council

The Economic and Social Council generally holds two-month long sessions each year, one in New York and the other at Geneva. The year-round work of the Council is carried out in its subsidiary bodies commissions and committees which meet at regular intervals and report back to the Council.

Subsidiary Bodies of un

The subsidiary machinery of the Council includes: (a) Five Regional Commissions: Economic COmmission for Africa (headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia), Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (Bangkok, Thailand), Economic Commission for Europe (Geneva, Switzerland), Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (Santiago, Chile) and Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (Baghdad, Iraq)
Nine Functional Commissions: Statistical Commission, Population Commission, Commission for Social Development, Commission on Human Rights, Commission on the Status of Women, Commission on Narcotic Drugs, Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, Commission on Sustainable Development, Commission on Science and Technology for Development,
Four Standing Committees: Committee for Programme and Coordination, Committee on Non-governmental Organisations and on Negotiations with Inter-govemmental Agencies; Commission on Human Settlement;
A number of standing expert bodies on such subjects as crime prevention and control, development planning, international cooperation in tax matters and transport of dangerous goods.

;All five regional commissions were established according to similar terms of reference to function in an analogous manner in their respective regions. Their main objective in to initiate and participate in measures for facilitating concerted action for economic and social development in order to raise the level of economic activity and advance the level of living and to maintain and strengthen economic relations among their members and other countries of the world. The commissions may, after discussions with any specialised agency functioning in the same general field, and with the approval of the council, establish such bodies as they deem appropriate in order to facilitate the carrying out of their responsibilities.

Monday 20 November 2017

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Davinder Kaur November 20, 2017 0 Comments

Composition and Sessions

The Security Council has primary responsibility, under the Charter, for the maintenance of international peace and security The Council has 15 members. five permanent members---(China, France, Russia the United Kingdom and the United States) and 10 non-permanent members elected by the General Assembly for two-year terms.

Each member of the Council has one vote Decisions on procedural matters are made by an affirmative vote of at least nine . of the 15 members. Decisions on substantive matters require nine votes, including the concurring votes of all five permanent members. This is the rule of ”Great Power unanimity", often referred to as the ”veto” power. All the five permanent members have exercised the right of veto at one time ”or another. If a permanent member does not support a decision but does not wish to block it through a veto, it may abstain from voting.

Under the Charter, all members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council. While other organs of the United Nations make recommendations to governments, the Council alone has the power to take decisions which the member states are obligated under the Charter to carry out.

Functions and Powers

Under the Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council are:

To maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
To investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction;
To recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms of settlement;
To formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
To determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
To call on member states to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force in order to prevent or stop aggression, 7. To take military action against an aggressor, . 8. To recommend admission of new members and the term on . which states may become parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice;
To exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in ”strategic areas”
. To recommend to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court.

Relations between the General Assembly and the Security Council

Although the, primary purpose of the Security Council is the maintenance of international peace and security and it is obligated to submit annual reports to the General Assembly on measures taken by it for this purpose, the General Assembly isnot authorised to comment upon the activities of the Security Council in a manner amounting to an assumption of concurrent jurisdiction in the matter of settling disputes. In other words, the Security Council is not subordinate to the overriding authority of the General Assembly.

The Security Council is composed of diplomats and bureaucrats while the General Assembly consists of politicians from nation states. The Security council is almost continuously in session, while the General Assembly meets only in annual sessions or in special sessions called by the Secretary-General, at the request of the ”Security Council or by a majority of its members.

The two organs work in conjunction on matters pertaining to the admission and expulsion of members, appointment of the Secretary-General and election of the Judges of_ the International Court of Justice

The relationship between the two bodies as originally envisaged by the Charter, has been dramatically changed by the passage of the Uniting for peace resolution in 1950. Since this Resolution was passed, the General Assembly has been able to wield wide powers when the Security Council is unable to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, due to lack of unanimity among the permanent members in any case, where there appeared to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression.

Sunday 19 November 2017

THE STRUCTURE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Davinder Kaur November 19, 2017 0 Comments

The general assembly

Composition

If the present international society were to be compared with a nation state, the UN General assembly could be help on represent a parliament in which the affairs of the world are debated and discussed by representatives of every region.

But the assembly is not yet a world parliament in my real sense. It has no government. The UN agencies are not ministries, they do not come directly under the general assembly; they have their own assemblies and decide their own policies, and the UN general assembly has only the most transitory power or influence over each. Still less are the member states committed to obey the assembly’s resolutions. So the assembly can discuss or recommend but rarely decide.

Again the general Assembly is not representative of peoples in the way an elected parliament is today supposed to be. It is representative of governments, and these may or may not themselves represent accurately the views of their own populations. Governments are represented on a highly uneven basis, with a nation of 50,000 people having the same representation as one of 500 million.

At the beginning of each regular session, the Assembly holds a general debate in which the member states express their Views on a wide range of matters of international concern. Due to the great number of questions which the Assembly is called upon to consider (there were 154 separate agenda items at the 1988 session of the Assembly,) for example, the Assembly allocates most questions to its seven main committees:

First Committee (disarmament and related international security matters
Second Committee (economic and financial matters)
Third Committee (social, humanitarian and cultural matters)
Fourth Committee (decolonisation and political matters)
Fifth Committee (administrative and budgetary matters)
Sixth Committee (legal matters)

There 15 also a General Committee composed of the President and 21 Vice-Presidents of the Assembly and the chairmen of the six main committees, and a Credentials Committee appointed by the President at each session.

While the decisions of the Assembly have no legal binding force on governments, they carry the weight of world opinion on major international issues; as well as the moral authority of the world community.

The work of the United Nations round the year is derived largely from the decisions of the General Assembly, that is to say, the will of the majority of the members as expressed in resolutions adopted by the Assembly. That work is carried out:

By committees and other bodies established by the Assembly to study and report on specific issues. such as disarmament outer space, peacekeeping, decolonisation, humans rights and apartheid;
In international conferences called by the Assembly and apartheid.
By the Secretariat of the United Nations the Secretary General and his staff of international civil servants.

Agenda

Besides the usual items (which differ from year to year), the General Assembly has to include in its agenda in each session the report of the Secretary-General which has to be discussed, as well as the reports of the Secretariat, the ECOSOC and the Trusteeship Council. Reports frOm the various subsidiary organs and specialised agencies also form part of its agenda as well as anything that has been left over ‘ from the previous session and needs continuous discussion. Any subject proposed by the principal organs, the Secretary-General and the members which are substantive in nature, have also to be included, though the General Assembly has the right to reduce them to five in number. Along with this, a discussion of the budget has to take place and any item brought by non-members is also to be considered.

The agenda covers a Wide, expanding and increasingly specialised range of topics. In recent years agendas have covered subjects ranging from the situation in the Middle East to the ”question Of the elderly and the aged”, a comprehensive review of peacekeeping operations to the establishment of an international university, the braindrain from developing countries to the question of human environment, the seabed to the outer space, the punishment of war criminals to international trade law. Thus there exists in the Assembly a meeting place where it is possible to discuss international issues of this kind which might not become _ the subject of a full-scale international conference. On the other hand, discussion of such an array of subjects, which are often technical, places a considerable strain on the resources of the delegations, especially of the smaller member states, the increasing complexity and technical character of the issues discussed, and the difficulty of the delegates in keeping abreast of them reflect problems similar to those confronting national parliaments. Inevitably, debates lasting two or three days on large issues of this kind are inadequate to deal with them. The purpose, in the eyes of the delegates, is probably to focus attention on urgent needs or pressing issues and sometimes they are indeed followed by more expert conferences to obtain even more concrete results.

Friday 17 November 2017

THE BIRTH OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Davinder Kaur November 17, 2017 0 Comments

Birth Of The United Nations ?

As the League of nations was a product of world war 1, so was the united nations product of world war 2. During the war period, the idea that a new, major international organisation would be needed to maintain peace and security in the post war world, gradually gained popularity among the allied powers.

The united Nations history Starts with the declaration made by president Roosevelt on january 6, 1941, to the congress of the United states. The four Freedoms declared in his speech as being of universal importance were:

Freedom of speech and expression;
Freedom of every person to worship God in his own way;
Freedom from want;

Freedom from fear.

These ideas formed the basis on which the United Nations was built. The united states had not initially entered World war 2 and had no thought of doing so in the immediate future.

src=SlidesharDespit

On the august 9, 1941, president Roosevelt asked the british prime minister Winston Cter signehurchill to draw up a joint declaration to guide their policies. The out come was the atlantic charter signed by the two leaders on august 12, 1941. The basis principles Put Forward in this were:

"Their Countries seek no aggrandizement, territorial or other.
They desire to see no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the people concerned.
They respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will leave; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self- government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them.
They will endeavour to further the enjoyment by all states, of access on equal terms, to the trade and raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity
They strive to bring about the fullest collaboration possible between all nations in the economic field, with the object of securing for all, improved labour standards, economic advancements and social security
After the final destruction of Nazi tyranny they hope to see established a peace which will afford the assurance that all the men in all the lands live out their lives in freedom from fear and want.
Such a peace should enable all men to traverse the high seas and oceans without hindrance
They Believe that all the nations of the world, for realistic as well as spiritual reasons, must come to the abandonment of such nations is essential."

Four months later, the united states joined the war after japan attacked pearl Harbour. The term "United Nations" was coined by president Roosevelt. On january 1, 1942, the Declaration by the United nations was signed In washington by the representatives of twenty-six nations.

At the yalta conference of February 1945, Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin dealt with the issues oaks. that had not been resolved at dumbarton As for colonial questions, the yalta conference agreed to a system of trusteeship limited to the following three categories:

Former mandates of the league of nations: these were former colonies of germany and turkey that had not yet gained independence.
Territories that the present colonial powers would voluntarily put under the supervision of the projected united nations trusteeship system.
Territories to be taken from germany and japan after world war 2.

Know about the purpose of the united nations

Thursday 16 November 2017

THE PURPOSE PRINCIPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Davinder Kaur November 16, 2017 0 Comments

The purpose of the UN

The purpose of the united nations are indicated in its preamble and are laid down in clearer article 1 of the charter. The preamble shows that the charter of the UN is born of the experiences of a devastating war and that it holds out hope of a lasting peace , based on a recognition of fundamental human rights which have been the casualties of the war, on the recognition of sovereign equality of all states and on the better economic and social conditions for the millions who have been victims of operation and exploitation.

The purpose of the UN, as laid down in article 1 of the charter are:

To maintain international peace and security;
To develop friendly relations among nations;
To international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character;
To be centre of harmonising character the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.

In the purpose states in Article 1 of the charter, Article 2 prescribes certain principles which may be describes as the basic rules of international ethics in accordance with which the organisation and its members shall act.

The organisation Is based on the principles of the sovereign equality of all its members.
All members shall fulfil in good faith their obligations as sete forth in the charter.
The member shall settle their disputes by peaceful means.
All members shall assist the United nations in any action it takes in accordance with the charter.
The organisation shall see to it that non-members also act in accordance with the charter.
The united nations shall not intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.
All the members shall refrain in their international integrity or political independence of any state or in any other manner, in accordance with the charter.

The League Covenant and the United Nations Charter.

A Comparison

Those who have usually attempted a comparison of the UN with the League of Nations have generally been pointing out the differences between them. Furthermore, comparisons have been made of the UN Charter,not taking into account actual practice under the Covenant and the Charter. Such a basis of comparison naturally leads to an exaggerated idea of the dissimilarities between the two systems. Obviously, any useful comparison of the League and the UN must be based on the League system as it developed under the Covenant. If that is done, it becomes clear that the gap separating the League of Nations and the United Nations is not as much as it is made out to be, that many provisions of the UN system have been taken directly from the Covenant, though usually with changes of names and phraseology, that other provisions are little more than codifications of League practice as it developed under the Covenant, and that still other provisions represent the logical development of ideas which were in the process of evolution when the League was functioning actively. Of course, there are many exceptions, some of them important ones. But the point upon which attention needs to be focus for the serious scholar of international organisation is that the United Nations does not represent a break with the past,but rather the continued application of old ideas and methods with some changes deemed necessary in the light of past experience.

Let us now turn to some obvious similarities. IF one sees the organisational structures of the two organisations at a glance these are quite apparent. Thus peace and security are the two major goals of both the organisations. Both were voluntary associations and sovereign states constituted the major units of the organisations. Both organisations had an Assembly with a universal membership where members enjoyed equality of voting rights. They also instituted a Council consisting of major powers as members. A secretariat which was to be permanent and international in character and headed by a Secretary-General remained the main executive office of both the institutions.

We will now turn to some of the differences in the organisational forms of these institutions. Despite the diversity seen in them, I will prove later that the central core remains the same in both

The Covenant was a small document with only 26 articles while the UN Charter included 111 articles. Whereas the League had three principle organs, the UN has six.

With decolonisation, the United Nations membership become much larger than that of the League. Membership in all the organs of the two institution also differed. The League Council council consisted of the principal Allied and Associated powers as well as four non-permanent members selected by the Assembly from time to time.The League Council as a result had the advantage of flexibility as neither the names nor the number of the Great Powers were mentioned. However this later proved to be a disadvantage in practice. It meant that the league Council was never a stable body as powers kept joining and leaving it.

The United Nations Security Council under Article 23 prescribes 15 members. Of these, five permanent members are mentioned by name. The general Assembly can elect ten non-permanent members for a two-year term. No change in this membership ratio can be made without the revision of the Charter.

Monday 13 November 2017

THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS Do you know ?

The Principal Purpose Of The League

Of all the predecessors of the United Nations, the league of Nations was the most significant one. It contributed innovative ideas, practices and experiences which were later taken up by the UN. The league was the brainchild of president woodrow wilson of the united states. In the last of the famous the 14 point that set out the war aims of his government, he proposed: a general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of the affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

This idea together with plans developed by great britain and france become the basis of negotiation at the versailles treaty that was intended to formally terminate world war 1. the principal purpose of the league, as might be expected after a war, was to prevent repetition of such a disaster ever again.

United nations Starting as a permanent organisation, the league of nations can be understood as the institutional version of the ad hoc conferences of the concert of the Europe, In between the league's annual conferences, its several organs met periodically. It had a permanent staff Headed by a secretary-General, and a permanent headquarter at the Geneva. In Order To promote general purpose of fostering international cooperation and maintenance of peace and security, member of the league, all of the sovereign states accepted certain obligation. They committed themselves to solving mutual conflicts without going to war. such conflicts were to be put before the organs of the league and parties to them were expected to defer to their decisions, some of which were legally binding. If a state went to war in defiance of the league of nations, the members could employ diplomatic, financial and even military sanctions against the offender.

Despite this lack of formal authority, the methods to be used by the league in setting disputes were carefully elaborated and institutionalised diplomatic practices that had frequently served well earlier. members agreed in principle to subject their disputes to arbitration or to put them before the Permanent court of international justice. But if a dispute was not of the kind to be treated legally by a tribunal, it was to be submitted to the council (or, for less specific treatment, to the assembly).
They also had the obligation to allow the passage of armed forces on the way to act against the violator of the obligations.

Causes Of The Failure Of The League

From the very beginning the League lacked the cooperation of some of the major powers. When the League was founded in 1919, it was assumed that all states in the world would join it, that is its membership would be universal. President Wilson of the United States, who initiated the institution, caused the first major disappointment.Influenced by both isolationist and utopian tendencies, the US senate refused to approve the Treaty of Versailles which the senators feared would mean abandonment of the time-honoured US principle of non-involvement in European affairs. Thus, the most important major power never joined the system of collective security.

Without US participation, the predominantly European character of the new organisation gained further emphasis . Japan was the only non-European member of any importance.

Except for Great Britain and France, which remained members during the entire life of the League, most of the major powers joined it only for brief periods. Germany joined in 1926, but withdrew in 1933, when Japan also left after having been condemned for its intervention in Manchuria. Italy withdrew in 1937 after its conquest of Ethiopia.The Soviet Union joined in 1934,but was thrown out after its attack on Finland in 1939.

The failure to obtain universality of membership and the unwillingness of some states to renounce was as a means of policy came in conflict with the fundamental principles of the League. Moreover, the members declined to accept the rule that an attack on any one state was to be considered an attack on all others, which was the main idea behind the League's concept of collective security. Since the sense of community and mutual confidence needed for the system of collective security was singularly lacking in the 1930s, the rather positive results achieved in the first decade of the existence of the League could not be repeated. During the first half of its existence, the League had comparatively more members and fewer disputes. It successfully brought several of the disputes to an end. These included hostilities between Bulgaria and Greece and disputes between Sweden and Finland over the Aaland Island in 1925.

Friday 10 November 2017

THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Davinder Kaur November 10, 2017 About International organisation , background of the UN 0 Comments

The Development Of International Organisation In The 19th Century. do you know?

Background Of the international organisation

There are some universally accepted prerequisites for the development of international organisation. First, the world must be divided into independent states, second. there must be an awareness among them of the problems arising out of their coexistence; and third, they must come to recognise the need for the creation of institutional devices to regulate their relations with one another. it was in the 19th century that these prerequisites were for the first time founded to be existent in proper order to bring about the birth of a modern international organisation.
Direct predecessors of modern international organisation can be classified into three main categories. In the first category came international conferences on world politics. There Were meeting held at the end of the major wars to arrive at settlements for the post-war period or gatherings in peace time to cope with crises of one sort or another among states.

The hague system
During the 19th century, development of machinery for adjudication of international disputes was a further progress towards international organisation. while diplomats coma philosophers and sovereigns were engaged in thinking of schemes for world peace and the world was alternating between periods of peace and small wars, a significant development took place. This was the evolution of international low which was largely the work of the dutch jurist, Hugo Grotius, in the 17th century. Leaving in the periods of wars, Grotius felt the urgency for peace. In Working out a system of international law, he derived great help from the roman ideas of jus gentium and jus naturale, which were there after fews into a single system of natural law from the body of custom which had been observed a,out the states from time immemorial. The hague peace conferences have been regarded as landmarks in the development of international law and organisation. The two conferences or 1899 and 1907 attempted to revise, clarify and codify the whole body or international law on a new footing.

Functional cooperation in 19th century
A Development of major important for the later formation of international organisation took place during the later part of 19th century. By that time it had been clear to the government of cooperation necessary to carry on activities in such field as postal and telegraphic services, meteorology, public health and international transport until then.
These international agencies processed certain common characteristics which may be enumerated as follow...

They were created by multilateral treaties there competence was limited to functional areas which served as a constitution that proclaimed the aims and objective of the organisation, laid down the institutional structure and defined the rites and duties of the member.
They were all voluntary organisation based on equality of all there member states.
Decision making was based on the principle of majoritarianism where all members had voting rights.

Many organisation had a distinct legal status enabling them to own property,to sue and be sued, and in some cases enjoy a measure of diplomatic immunity.
Decision making was carried on it two ways by drafting international treaties and submitting them to the member states for ratification, or by adoption resolutions recommending actions by member states. Some organisation had administrative and miner policy making powers.

k now about the league of the nations

Thursday 30 November 2017

THE UNITED NATIONS PLAN FOR NAMIBIAN INDEPENDENCE

Tuesday 28 November 2017

The Special Committee on Decolonisation

Sunday 26 November 2017

UN Journey From Trusteeship to Independence

Saturday 25 November 2017

Wednesday 22 November 2017

Monday 20 November 2017

Composition and Sessions

Sunday 19 November 2017

The general assembly

Composition

Friday 17 November 2017

Birth Of The United Nations ?

Thursday 16 November 2017

The purpose of the UN

Monday 13 November 2017

THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS Do you know ?

The Principal Purpose Of The League

Friday 10 November 2017

Background Of the international organisation

Contact Form

analytics

Popular

Blog Archive

analytics

analytics

statcounter

Recent Post

Tags