Suchergebnisse

Die UN-Sanktionen gegen Libyen zu Beginn der 90er Jahre setzten im UN-Sicherheitsrat eine Kontroverse über die Interpretation der zentralen Rechtsnormen in den internationalen Beziehungen in Gang. Internationale Prinzipien wie Rechtstaatlichkeit, Unschuldsvermutung und Respekt vor der Autorität internationaler Organisationen wurden in dieser Kontroverse sowohl von Befürwortern als auch von Gegner der Sanktionen zur Rechtfertigung ihrer Position angeführt. Somit verdeutlicht diese Kontroverse dreierlei: Erstens, wie bedeutend das Prinzip von Legitimität in den internationalen Beziehungen ist. Zweitens, dass dieses Prinzip symbolische Macht verleiht, um die sich jedes Land aus strategischen Gründen bemüht. Und drittens, dass die Verteilung dieser symbolischen Macht keineswegs mit der Verteilung der tatsächlichen, materiellen Macht korreliert. Daher ist es keineswegs unmöglich, dass offensichtlich starke Staaten von offensichtlich schwachen Staaten auf Grundlage der symbolischen Macht in einer internationalen Debatte besiegt werden können. (rll-swp)

View that the United Nations Security Council was designed to avoid conflict among the Great Powers, and has been successful in this regard; in context of inability of the UN to stop the US-led war against Iraq. Covers history and establishment of the Security Council, power and legitimacy, and influence of the UN on US foreign policy.

A fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the UN Security Council has led to the criticism following the most recent Iraq-US war, which describes the UN opposition as irrelevant & unable to act or effect change. Rather than seeing the Council in moralistic & legal terms, the Council must be viewed in realistic political terms within its historical framework. The Council was primarily established for maintaining peace & avoiding conflict among the Great Powers rather than for protection of the weak from the strong. Thus the veto guarantees inaction precisely when tension is greatest between the Great Powers. The Council has sufficient legitimacy in international politics that its approval was sought by Washington prior to the Iraq War, that countries such as Canada & Turkey followed the UN signals as to whether to support the mission, & that denial of approval realized the more modest set of UN goals & powers in that it reinforced the legal principles of the Charter & raised the costs of unilateralism to a Great Power. This is important because it influences how US foreign policy makers assess US interests in world politics. L. Kehl

An examination of the nature of the UN Security Council's power notes that the UN Charter grants the Security Council vast formal powers but not the mechanisms to enact them. Therefore, the Council's power is contingent upon the legitimacy conferred upon it by relevant actors, & the esteem in which it is held by member states. A theory of legitimacy & symbolic power for international organizations is considered in light of three areas in which states compete for symbolic rewards: the agenda, membership, & peacekeeping. It is pointed out that legitimacy & authority are always contested, & the Security Council's symbolic capital is especially vital in the absence of unanimity. International actors fight over the deployment of symbols to further their political interests, & it is important to recognize that efforts to legitimize an institution invariably spawn counter efforts to de-legitimize it. Recent discussions about reforming the Council are examined to stress the significance of symbolic politics & the need for international organizations to consistently cultivate their legitimacy in order not to lose it. If the Security Council lost its legitimacy it would be forced to depend on coercion to wield power which would ultimately bring about its demise. J. Lindroth