Q9)

International Law is determined after successful cooperation and negotiation between

different countries. Over time, a number of organizations have been constructed that have
ensured that rights of the refugees and marginalized people are protected. One organization
that has had the most influence on international sphere is the United National Security
council. Nevertheless, these organizations have the responsibility of maintaining agreed upon
terms in each member country so that issues can be treated the same way internationally.
However, the lack of sovereignty of these organizations made it difficult to enforce these
policies. When these countries are unable to efficiently implement these policies, there exist
legally binding clauses in their membership with the organization that can result in
infiltration by armed forces to stop or alleviate different crises.
Allen and Schomerus (2012, p.117) describe that in the charters of these organizations
explicitly state that the organization can form a mutual assisting force that will ensure that
these laws and policies and implemented in the member countries. However, it was unclear
how to determine that when will an organization will take an action towards the countries that
are violating or not implementing the agreed upon policies. Hence, an international court was
established that would pass judgment known as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and
some other forces that were of minor significance.
Throughout history, it can be observed that violence has usually been propagated by
third-party influence. For this reason, it had been important to develop an international force
that would stop the third-party influence of other countries for their own agendas and
benefits. Specially, after the World War I and then World War II, it was significantly
important to ensure that countries were monitored and internationally agreed upon terms were
to be enforced. After the emergence of UNSC and the ICC, it was thought that these
problems would be solved eventually. However, it can be seen that that initially ICC was
only allowed to take action in case of issues that are relevant on an International Level to stop
rulers and factions that were propagating violence and conflicts in countries beyond their
borders. However, overtime, it became obvious that the security council and the court lacked
power or had its own agendas. It was inefficient in stopping many activities that were deemed
wrong and on which action was supposed to be taken.
Governments that were doing wrong were supported and the Chapter VII of the
International Human Rights Charter was not enough. Many leaders such as “North Korea’s
Kim Il Sung, Cambodia’s Pol Pot, Ethiopia’s Mengistu Haile Mariam, Chile’s Pinochet,
Zaire’s Mobutu, and Somalia’s Siyaad Barre” had acted violently and wrongly yet they were
never charged for it (Allen and Schomerus, 2012, p.124). Moreover, it was also seen that
countries that had just got independence would terrorize their opponents under the guise of
anti-colonialism. An important example of this was that the Tanzanian invasion of Uganda in
1971 to stop barbaric regime of Idi Amin gained little to no official support. Moreover, it was
not just that it not supported, but rather it was marked as a breach of International Law.
Moreover, the ruler was allowed to live in peace in his exile. Similarly, it can be observed
that there were massacres in Srebrenica in 1995, there were mass killings in 1994; yet the
criminal courts of Yugoslavia and Rwanda had taken little to no urgent action for many years.
Moreover, even in Arusha there were many lawless activities that demanded response,
however “the lack of adequate monitoring in Arusha suggests that here too international
criminal justice was a means of just to do something, not a genuine effort by the governments
of powerful states to reassert the principles agreed in the 1940s” (Allen and Schomerus, 2012,
p.126). Finally, in 1998, there was some positive development, and the Rome Statue came
forward. This allowed organizations to carry out investigations and take stronger actions in
different countries. Though, this was still not as efficient at it seemed on paper, organizations
like North American Treaty Organization (NATO), had started to willingly listen to the ICC.
If this statue was possibly formed before these massacres, it was possible that they could have
been avoided.
Initially, this organization could make little to no difference. However, over time, as
its influence increased it was able to stop massacres in some countries and create a narrative
that supported the abolition of violent acts. Regardless, in conclusion, it can be determined
that even though the time to time there have been successful interventions by the
organization, till date their agendas are unclear and change time to time. The current
massacre and killing going on with the Palestinians in Israel is an example of the inefficiency
of these organizations. For example, the USA voted against military intervention in this
matter. Hence, it shows that the veto powers of permanent members, particular agendas of the
dominating countries and the organization determines whether the organization will take an
efficient action or not. Nevertheless, while there are still issues in the organization’s
implementation because of the bureaucratic red tapes in different countries, it is obvious that
there are diverging agendas of the organization.