Analyze And Explain The Functions' Effectiveness And Limits

Analyze And Explain The Functions Effectiveness And Limits Of The

Analyze and explain the functions, effectiveness and limits of the United Nations in the international system (give specific examples of how the UN has been involved). Write eight hundred words (10 points) 2. Explain and describe the most important functions of International courts in international relations (include the different types of courts and give examples of cases in which those courts have been involved). Write nine hundred words (10 points) 3. Explain ana analyze the issues involved in the Spratly Islands dispute . Write nine hundred words (i.e why do states care about small pieces of land, what are the implications of creating artificial islands, how China and the other states resolve their competing maritime claims, and how international law assist in this dispute). Write nine hundred words. (11 points) List the sources that have been used,

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The United Nations (UN) plays a pivotal role in maintaining international peace and security, fostering cooperation among states, and promoting human rights and development. As a multilateral organization established in 1945, its effectiveness and limitations are continuously scrutinized through its actions and failures across diverse global issues. This paper critically evaluates the functions, effectiveness, and limits of the UN, providing specific examples of its involvement in conflicts, peacekeeping, humanitarian efforts, and development initiatives. Additionally, the role of international courts—such as the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court—in shaping international relations is examined, emphasizing their primary functions, types, and notable cases. Finally, the complex dispute over the Spratly Islands exemplifies the multifaceted challenges in territorial sovereignty, maritime law, and regional security, illustrating how states' interests and international legal mechanisms interact in such conflicts.

The Functions of the United Nations in the International System

The United Nations was founded to promote international peace, security, and cooperation after the devastation of World War II. Its core functions include conflict prevention, peacekeeping, dispute resolution, humanitarian assistance, and fostering sustainable development. These functions are carried out through various specialized agencies and peace operations, with the UN Security Council serving as the primary body responsible for maintaining peace and security.

One of the most visible aspects of the UN’s work is its peacekeeping missions. For example, the UN Peacekeeping Forces have been deployed to conflicts such as the Korean War (1950–1953), the Congo Crisis (1960s), and more recently in Mali and South Sudan. These missions aim to create stability and facilitate political processes. Despite their successes, peacekeeping operations face significant limits. They often struggle with insufficient resources, complex political environments, and mandates that lack enforcement capability. The peacekeeping mission in Darfur, Sudan, exemplified these limitations, where despite a substantial deployment, violence persisted due to disjointed international cooperation.

The UN’s effectiveness is also evident in its ability to mobilize humanitarian aid and support post-conflict rebuilding. Agencies like UNICEF, the World Food Programme, and UNHCR have played crucial roles in responding to crises — such as the Syrian refugee crisis and natural disasters like the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Yet, the UN’s effectiveness is constrained by political interests, especially within the Security Council, where permanent members may veto actions, hindering swift responses. The Syrian conflict highlighted this, where geopolitical rivalries stymied efforts for decisive intervention.

The UN Regional and Global Initiatives in development reflect its broader role. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), adopted in 2015, showcase the UN’s broader vision for global progress, encompassing poverty reduction, health, gender equality, and climate action. However, the implementation of SDGs varies, often hampered by financial constraints, differing national priorities, and geopolitical tensions.

While the UN has achieved significant milestones, its structural limitations, notably the veto power held by five permanent members of the Security Council, restrict its capacity for decisive action. Such limitations raise questions about reforming the organization to better adapt to contemporary global challenges, like cyber security threats, transnational terrorism, and climate change.

In summary, the UN’s functions—conflict prevention, peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, and development—are essential in maintaining global order. However, its operational limitations, including political deadlock, resource constraints, and sovereignty issues, hinder its full potential. Despite these challenges, the UN remains a critical forum for international cooperation and dispute resolution, exemplified in peacekeeping missions, humanitarian aid responses, and global development efforts.

The Role of International Courts in International Relations

International courts serve as judicial bodies that interpret and apply international law, resolve disputes between states, and hold individuals accountable for international crimes. Their roles are vital in fostering rule-based international relations by providing legal mechanisms to address conflicts, human rights violations, and disputes over sovereignty.

The primary international courts include the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Court (ICC), and various specialized tribunals like the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Each court has specific functions aligned with their jurisdiction and mandate.

The ICJ, established in 1945, is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. Its primary function is to settle legal disputes between states and issue advisory opinions on international legal questions. For example, the ICJ adjudicated the dispute over the delimitation of maritime boundaries between Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire and the territorial sovereignty over the Western Sahara. Its rulings are binding; however, enforcement depends on the willingness of states, which can limit the impact of its decisions. The ICJ also contributes to the development of international law by clarifying legal principles through its judgments.

The ICC, created in 2002, is tasked with prosecuting individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It acts complementarily to national judicial systems. A notable case involves the conviction of Charles Taylor, former Liberian president, for crimes committed during the Sierra Leone Civil War. The ICC’s role is significant in deterring future atrocities and establishing accountability, but its limitations include not having jurisdiction over all states (not all nations are parties to the Rome Statute), and political interference has sometimes undermined its authority.

Regional courts, like the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, focus on safeguarding human rights within their respective regions. These courts have been effective in holding governments accountable for human rights violations. For example, the European Court’s ruling against Russia over the treatment of Chechen civilians demonstrates its influence on regional justice.

International courts serve multiple functions: resolving interstate disputes, prosecuting international crimes, and protecting human rights. Nevertheless, issues such as jurisdictional disputes, enforcement limitations, and political resistance restrict their overall influence. The legal frameworks established by these courts are crucial in promoting peace and justice, yet their success depends on state compliance and international support.

The importance of these courts in international relations lies in their ability to provide legal remedies for violations and disputes, thereby reducing reliance on military force. They help reinforce international norms and promote accountability, which are essential for global stability and justice.

The Spratly Islands Dispute: Issues and International Law

The Spratly Islands dispute involves territorial claims by multiple states, including China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. The strategic location of these islands and surrounding waters makes them highly valuable for their potential natural resources, fishing grounds, and maritime routes. This contest over small land features has broad implications for regional security and international law.

States’ interest in small islands often transcends their size, rooted in strategic positioning, resource control, and economic gains. For China, asserting sovereignty over the Spratly Islands aligns with its broader strategy to expand its maritime influence, secure sea lanes, and access potential oil and gas resources. The Philippines and Vietnam, on the other hand, emphasize sovereignty based on historical claims and the rights provided under international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Artificial island construction by China has significantly escalated tensions, as it transforms submerged features into artificial land capable of supporting military outposts, surveillance stations, and runways. These developments raise concerns over militarization and destabilization in the Indo-Pacific. The creation of artificial islands challenges existing maritime boundaries and threatens regional stability by potentially changing the status quo of territorial control and freedom of navigation.

Resolving the Spratly Islands dispute involves multiple diplomatic and legal mechanisms. ASEAN and China have engaged in negotiations, but progress has been slow and often hampered by conflicting sovereignty claims and strategic interests. The Philippines brought a case to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague in 2013, challenging China’s extensive claims based on UNCLOS. In 2016, the tribunal ruled against China’s territorial claims, invalidating features rights to historic titles and affirming that certain artificial constructions violate international law.

However, enforcement of such rulings remains complex, as China has rejected the tribunal’s jurisdiction and ruling, continuing its activities in the region. International law, particularly UNCLOS, provides a framework for dispute resolution and delineation of maritime boundaries through legal binding processes. It emphasizes freedom of navigation, the rights of coastal states, and norms against militarization of features. While binding rulings can influence state behavior, adherence depends on the political will of involved states.

Overall, the Spratly Islands case underscores the importance of international law in managing overlapping sovereignty claims, but also highlights the limitations in enforcement and the influence of strategic interests. It demonstrates that peaceful resolution relies on diplomatic negotiations, adherence to international legal principles, and regional cooperation. Maintaining stability in this volatile area requires a balanced approach that respects legal norms while addressing the strategic concerns of claimant states.

Conclusion

The effectiveness and limits of the United Nations and international courts are central to understanding contemporary global governance. While the UN provides a vital platform for peace and development, structural and political limitations often impede its full potential. International courts contribute significantly to peace and justice but face jurisdictional and enforcement challenges. The Spratly Islands dispute exemplifies how sovereignty, law, and strategic interests intertwine, necessitating a legal and diplomatic approach grounded in international law. Strengthening international institutions, promoting adherence to legal rulings, and fostering regional cooperation are essential steps toward managing complex disputes and ensuring global stability.

References

- Babbitt, B. (2019). The Role of the United Nations in International Peacekeeping. Journal of International Relations, 34(2), 123-138.

- Crawford, J. (2017). The International Court of Justice: Law and Politics. Cambridge University Press.

- International Court of Justice. (2020). Cases and Decisions. Retrieved from https://www.icj-cij.org/

- Khadiagala, G. M., & McConnell, G. (2020). The Idea of a Regional Court: The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. African Journal of International and Comparative Law, 28(2), 182-202.

- Mearsheimer, J. (2019). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W.W. Norton & Company.

- Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Philippines. (2016). The Arbitral Award in the South China Sea Dispute. Retrieved from https://www.mfa.gov.ph/

- Roberts, A. (2018). The International Law of the Sea. Transnational Publishers.

- Sun, Y. (2021). Artificial Islands and Maritime Security: The South China Sea Dispute. Security Studies, 30(4), 563-585.

- United Nations. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from https://sdgs.un.org/

- Zhang, F. (2020). China's Maritime Strategy and the South China Sea. Pacific Affairs, 93(4), 887-905.