The Unmapped Road of the Security Council: Exaggeration vs. Factuality
Dr. Shadi A. Alshdaifat – SJD
Assistant Professor of Public International Law – College of Law – University of Sharjah – Sharjah – UAE – SJD – Golden Gate University School of Law – 2012
“Peace is not made at the council table or by treaties, but in the hearts of men”.
—Herbert Hoover, the 31st president of the United States (1929-1933).
International chaos destroys livelihoods, economies, and a civilized world order that took centuries to form; the result of such phenomena is almost always catastrophic. This is one reason given for its criminalization. One compelling rationale for criminalizing international chaos is the threat it presents to international relations. The questions that rise are whether international chaos is on its way to decline and decay, or is the rise of international chaos so relentless that we are unfortunate to experience different versions of it in coming years? There is ample evidence to reinforce the idea that international chaos is declining through the work and legislation of the Security Council. The Security Council in its current international form is not on a road leading to a greater freedom of rights. Thus, there is a clear map of hope that instability in the world will gradually lose its ideological appeal, and will hence, lose the admiration of some groups and nations.
However, the structure and competence of the Security Council will continue to be a complex feature of international law due to the conflicting interests of nation states. The growth of international breach of peace and security is the result of oppression and the various standards of international social values; this has been evidenced by the militias and resistance movements demonstrating impulses of aggression against injustice. To that end, strengthening of the Security Council is one of the key elements of re-mapping the international path and to determine parameters for establishing a stable and prosperous world without violence and wars, and to find collective responses to the most complicated challenges.
One of those challenges is the frustration and exaggeration of the role of the Security Council, which was divided since its creation along ideological lines on the one level. The Security Council’s lack of action and factual resolutions can sometimes be frustrating and devastating on the other level. Nevertheless, history has solemnly shown that the world order is better served by working through the great powers rather than by alienating them.