Total General

For a period o f time it seemed that the UN had become irrelevant, that the international system would revert to a system o f unilateral interventions. As Professor Adam Roberts argues, the failure o f the Council to agree was a clear dem onstration o f the lack o f a UN based collective security system, and showed that the UN is not at the heart o f the existing international security system. The inability to agree undoubtedly showed the limitations o f the organisation. At the same time the fact that the operation proved questionable, was based on questionable grounds and went wrong in the occupation phase, proved the Security Council was right to be nervous.85 This is

82 Interview w ith M O D O fficial 2 4 th February 2 0 0 9

83 In terview w ith P rofessor Craig N . M urphy 3 rd Septem ber 2 008 84 In terview w ith Sam D a w s 9 lh D ecem b er 2 0 0 9

85 Interview w ith P rofessor A dam Roberts 8 lh D ecem b er 2 0 0 9

substantiated by Sam Daws w ent on to state that “the fact that no w eapons o f m ass destruction were found in Iraq I think in some w ays resulted in an uplift o f legitim acy o f UN processes.” 86

Since its creation the authority o f the Security Council has been continuously challenged

“I f you read a history o f the Security Council it’s always had this sort o f rollercoaster ups and downs ever since it was established. The interesting thing is its resilience it comes back from the dead as many tim es as Lazarus,

0*7

you know it’s astonishing.”

Despite these challenges the Security Council continues and this continuance is in part based on the strength o f it’s legitimacy within the international comm unity. According to David Bosco this legitimacy comes from a num ber o f areas, representativeness, effectiveness, power, and procedural propriety.88 This idea is backed up by Barnett and Duvall who argue that International organisations have to demonstrate legitimacy in two ways, procedurally and substantively.89 The question is then raised as to w hether or not the Council is meeting these necessary requirements for legitimacy.

I f you begin with representation the Council is clearly not a reflection o f the world as it is today, instead it reflects a power balance which is long gone. This leads to the argument, as Hurd outlines that that “the Council’s legitimacy is in peril unless the body can be reformed to account for recent changes in world politics.” 90 W hich then raises the issue o f reform, should the membership and structure o f the Council be

86 In terview w ith Sam D aw s 9 th D ecem b er 2 0 0 9 87 Interview w ith Lord D avid Hannay 6 th O ctober 2 0 0 9 88 B o sc o ,F /v e (2 0 0 9 )

89 For m ore se e Barnett, P o w e r (20 0 5 ) 90 Hurd, M yth s o f M e m b ersh ip (2008)

altered to make the council m ore representative, and w ould this indeed increase the legitim acy o f the body? A s mentioned above there are argum ents to suggest this w ould be the case, and whilst there is “an obvious tension between size and representation” 91 as one UK mission official noted

“It should not be forgotten that if we do nothing with the council the dynamic within the council changes routinely anyway, in term s o f w hich particular m em ber states belong on it and that is something that the expansion or contraction or whatever will have no impact on.92

This was borne out by Lord Hannay who stated

“I don’t m yself ever buy this idea that the Security Council, constituted as it is now, is completely discredited, incapable o f doing anything, its all a lot o f nonsense frankly. Just look at it, you’ll see its doing things every day and do people say well because you've only got x num ber o f people, three Africans, it cannot be legitimate. Well no o f course they don’t say that, it’s not true, it’s simply not true. Do the three Africans on the security council have a very big weight in w hat’s done in Africa o f course they do, they don’t need to be five in order to do that, its not going to make that much difference. So I think it’s an overrated subject and one which every tim e it’s put to the test and you fail, it diminishes the legitimacy o f the institution which is what the people who put forward the reform proposals are said to be trying to support, so I think they ought to be more cautious.9-1

This was contradicted by Professor Craig N. M urphy who argued that if reform occurred it “would be easier for example for UN peacekeeping to operate in Africa, in parts o f Africa, rather than having to operate with the A U ” he did however then go on to state that “my sense is that Security Council refonn is alm ost impossible.” 94

91 Interview w ith U K M ission O fficial 27lh A ugust 2 008 92 Interview w ith U K M issio n O fficial 2 7 th A ugust 2 0 0 8 93 Interview w ith Lord D avid Hannay 6 th O ctober 2 0 0 9

94 In terview w ith P rofessor Craig N . Murphy 3rd Septem ber 2 008

There have been several attempts to raise the question o f Security Council reform, originally in 1993 with the establishment o f the General Assem bly w orking group on reform, in the High Level Panel Report95, and at the world summit in 2005. N one o f the suggestions have been successful and as Lord Hannay implies lead to a scenario which only continues to undermine the legitimacy o f the organisation. W hilst reform o f the Council would indeed make the institution more representative, there are still too m any unanswered questions as to whether or not it would improve the capabilities and efficacy o f the organisation. Although it would improve buy in from developing states as to the legitimacy o f operations it would not necessarily improve the provision o f troops capable o f undertaking the increasingly complex peacekeeping m issions which are being mandated.

The next standard relates to the efficacy o f the organisation, w hether or not it is fulfilling its mandate, and producing substantive results. For some academ ics such as Joseph Nye, whilst "highly technical organisations may be able to derive their legitimacy from their efficacy alone....the more an institution deals with broad values,

the more its democratic legitimacy becomes relevant."96 Therefore for N ye, the

outcom e is not as important as the process o f decision making. For other academ ics how ever the outcome is more important in the provision o f legitimacy which in relation to the Security Council this entirely depends on the interpretation o f its mandate. Under the Charter it is given primary responsibility for the maintenance o f international peace and security. W hat this means is however open to a variety o f interpretations. There

95 U nited N a tio n s, H igh L ev el P ane! R e p o rt on Threats, C h a llen g es a n d C han ge, A m o re S e c u re W orld:

o u r s h a r e d re sp o n s b ility 2 0 0 4 )

96N y e , Joseph S., G lo b a liz a tio n s d e m o c ra tic d eficit (F oreign Affairs: 80: 4: 2 0 0 1 )

have been a num ber o f abject failures on behalf o f the Security Council including Rw anda and Somalia, there have however also been a num ber o f successes, including Cam bodia, M ozam bique, and El-Salvador. For some the failures are a clear dem onstration o f the "inadequacies o f the council's strategies to date for sustaining the

• • • 07

peace it sometimes helps establish." Lord Hannay, a form er am bassador on the

Security Council, believes however that “the UN has learned quite a lot o f lessons, its becom e m uch more professional in its operations, its headquarters staff are much better organised, in the field it on the whole seems to be a bit better” whilst still recognising

QO

that “there are still terrible failures.” These failures, it can be argued may help improve the Council

"by revealing the structural weakness o f the council manifested in the lack o f accountability, the non affirmation o f prevailing legal principles, and the non representative nature o f the council's com position."99

The failure to deal with these problems will only further undermine the authority the council has within the international system.

The issue o f pow er has been dealt with above so the final standard is based on procedural propriety. For practitioners such as Sir Jeremy Greenstock

“You get clear legitimacy from a UN security council resolution because that has gone through a process and careful thought by quite experienced minds backed up the secretariat etc. And it has an established base, in the UN which is a treaty based organisation which obliges its m em ber states to do certain things under certain conditions, so you've got legitimacy through the UN Security Council being properly used to lay the basis for a peacekeeping operation.”

97 M alon e in M alon e, S e c u rity C o u n cil (20 0 4 ) pg 3 98 Interview w ith Lord D avid Hannay 6 ,h O ctober 2 0 0 9

99 A d elm an and Surhke in M alone, S e c u rity C o u n cil (2 0 0 4 ) pg 4 8 4 100 Interview w ith Sir Jerem y G reenstock 8th D ecem b er 2 0 0 9