Preface

The last one decade has unfolded such radical changes in

the international political environments as, perhaps, never

before been witnessed since the end of the Second World War.

The UN Security Council which was previously being referred

to as irrelevant in dealing with the pressing world problems of

peace and security has suddenly become very active. But in

reality, the demise of cold war and the break up of the Soviet

Union have put the Security Council into the American pocket

and that country uses it to her full advantage at the cost of

other states. In these circumstances there is a crying need for

reform in the Security Council to enable it to serve the

humanity as a whole and not the covert objectives of any

individual country.

The primary goal of the United Nations is to maintain

international peace and security. The Preamble to the Charter

sets out in noble words: "We, the people of the United Nations,

determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of

war, which twice in our life time has brought untold sorrow to

mankind...". Throughout the complex Great Power negotiations

which led to the conference at San Francisco, the emphasis was

on a particular body within the United Nations - the Security

Council - performing that role. Though the League of Nations

on whose ashes the United Nations is built also had a council

but the Charter gives the Security Council a position which is

far greater than that which the League Council had held. One of

the most important differences between them is that while the

League Council acted only as a kind of standing committee, the

members of the United Nations have conferred on the Security

Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of

international peace and security. They have entrusted it with

the authority to act on their behalf and obligated themselves to

accept and carry out its decisions.

Security Council is the central and most important organ

of the United Nations. It consists of fifteen members; five

permanent and ten non-permanent elected members. Five

permanent members are; the United States, the United

Kingdom, France, China and Russia (previously Soviet Union),

which dominated both the war efforts against the Axis and

postwar planning for the new international organization. Their

concurrence is must for any decision of the council on

substantive matters. In other words they enjoy veto power and

 Ill

anyone of them can block a decision of the Security Council on

any matter if it disagrees with that decision. As an agency

responsible for the maintenance of the world peace the Security

Council is so organized as to be able to function continuously,

and for this purpose every member, permanent and elected, has

to maintain a representative at the seat of the Organization who

would be available all the time for consultations, deliberations

and official meetings.

The powers of the Security Council are very

comprehensive and have been given in considerable detail in

the Charter. These powers extend both to the use of force and

also to the calling on member states for certain types of action.

The Security Council alone among the organs of the United

Nations, is specifically given authority and power to coerce.

Through this power of coercion it was intended to be in a

position to enforce peace. This was to be one of the great

advantages of the United Nations over the League of Nations,

which was considered to have been weakened in making

decisions by the fact that it was not able to enforce them when

made. The fate of the United Nations was to be like that of the

League of Nations - it could hardly be otherwise - in that the

 IV

Security Council would try persuasion in case of a dispute and

next might try economic sanctions, but it was to have both the

authority and power to use military sanctions - force in the

most conventional sense. It is this power of the Security

Council which would have a deterrent effect on any

possible aggressor.

Despite these extensive powers, since its inception in

January 1946 until the end of cold war in the late eighties, the

Security Council has been the least efficient and effective

action agency that could be conceived. In the post-World

War II era parting of ways by the two superpowers shattered all

hopes of great power unity. Differences of opinions among its

permanent members crippled the functioning of the Security

Council and it became almost redundant. Korean case was an

exception and was the result of an extraordinary situation. Even

in this case the Security Council did not act in the letter and

spirit of the Charter provisions and the United States resorted

the cover of Council resolution for its own policy goals.

Though the ending of cold war ushered in an era of cooperation

among the permanent members it gave the Security Council a

face which is very dangerous to other members of the United

Nations. While in the cold war period it was serving none and

harming none, in the post-cold war era it is serving one and

harming all others. It has merely become an instrument of

foreign policy implementation of the only remaining

superpower - the United States. Gulf war is a glaring example.

When President George Bush wanted to teach Saddam Husein a

lesson and to safeguard Middle East oil, he used the fig leaf of

the United Nations imprimatur to cover Operation Desert

Storm. Security Council's actions against the post Gulf War

Iraq also justify this fact. If ever the US sees any difficulty to

achieve its goal through the Security Council it even dares to

bypass the UN as did it in Kosovo through NATO.

As far the composition of the Security Council is

concerned it does not in any way reflect the present day world

realities. The power of veto for just five members is a relic of

immediate post-World War II days when the victors decided to

apportion the geopolitical spoils of war among themselves. The

world situations have changed unrecognisably since then. Most

of the states in Asia, Africa and Latin America, which were

colonies of western powers, have got independence during this

period and joined the United Nations. Some countries, which

 VI

were once big powers, have lost their status. Japan and

Germany which were materially destroyed during the war have

emerged as the two economic giants. Also the present structure

of the Security Council is Europe centered. There is no voice

for developing nations who form the majority of UN members.

Two continents of Africa and Latin America are not

permanently represented. All these factors demand a change in

the structure of the Security Council to make it more

representative and reflective of present day world realities.

This thesis is devoted to a thorough study of the Security

Council, its weaknesses and loopholes. It consists of six

chapters. In the first chapter an attempt has been made to trace

the origin of great power factor in international politics which

resulted in the formation of the Concert of Europe, a club of

great powers, in the nineteenth century and finally led to the

creation of a coterie of such powers in the twentieth century

international organizations. Thereafter highlighting the

structure of the Council of the League of Nations which was a

counter part of the UN Security Council in the League era a

detailed account of the composition and structure of the

Security Council with its voting procedure has been presented.

 vu

In the second chapter under the functions and powers of

the security council a general framework of the Council's main

responsibility of maintaining international peace and security

combined with the limitations imposed on its competence under

the principle of state sovereignty and domestic jurisdiction has

been reviewed. Leaving the important powers for discussion in

subsequent chapters, here only the less important powers

relating to the regional agencies and trust territories and the

implied powers, which the security council must have to

perform its duties effectively, have been discussed. Besides,

Security Council's other functions which it has to perform in

addition to its primary function of maintaining international

peace and security have also been covered.

Chapter third deals with the powers of the Security

Council in the field of pacific settlement of disputes. These

powers enable the Council to solve the disputes between the

parties peacefully and reduce the chances of escalating them

into major wars. While acting under its powers of pacific

settlement the security council maintains complete impartiality

throughout its involvement.

 VllI

Chapter fourth concentrates on the most important powers

of the Security Council i.e., its coercive powers. They are

related to the enforcement measures which it may employ while

dealing with a threat to the peace, breach of the peace and acts

of aggression. It is these powers which give the Security

Council a prominent position among the organs of the

United Nations.

Fifth chapter sheds light on the peacekeeping power of

the Security Council. Though the Charter does not specifically

provide anywhere for peacekeeping operations, the Security

Council has developed such a power and has effectively used it

in containing international violence. They are said to be

derived from the overall responsibility of the Security Council

in maintaining international peace and security.

Last chapter critically analyses the composition and

powers of the Security Council as studied in the preceding

chapters. The conclusion sums up the study. It is observed that

the Charter provisions relating to the Security Council needs

thorough revision for providing this body greater

representativeness, credibility, legitimacy, authority and

transparency.