Aceh.b-cdn.net

 Evaluate/Assess the effectiveness of non-legal responses in achieving world order/peace/securityDerived from peaceful relations between nation states, the achievement of World Order (WO) is increasingly dependent upon the effectiveness of non-legal responses in directing legal measures to promote peace and resolve conflict. Due to the interdependence of nation states, non-legal measures have proved largely effective in promoting the achievement world order but are flawed significantly due to a lack of enforceability. In particular, the media has been extremely effective in increasing awareness of humanitarian issues through their coverage of world events, such as in the case of Darfur and East Timor. Through vessels such as world news, academic articles and discussions, the media has also been instrumental in providing socio-political commentary that has capabilities of exposing flaws within the law, such as within the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) (NPT) and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Non-government organisations (NGO’s) such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), International Crisis Group (ICG) and Amnesty International (Amnesty) have also been largely effective in achieving world order due to their ability to assist civilians within conflicts and persuade nations to reform humanitarian law. Whilst each measure seeks to promote peace and achieve world order, non-legal measures are fundamentally limited due to a lack of enforcement. Moreover, their ability to assist nations is limited due to the principle of state sovereignty as it allows nations to both comply and reject these responses. In this way, non-legal responses are mostly effective at pressuring countries into settling disputes and rectifying international humanitarian issues to achieve world peace. The media is largely effective at increasing the awareness of humanitarian issues, and in turn, pressuring international legal measures to take action and nation states to comply. The media, as a non-legal response, is more flexible in dealing with countries as they are not subject to the same niceties as the UN. As a result, the media is often responsible for exposing breaches of humanitarian law, such as China’s role in the humanitarian crises in Darfur (2003 – now). Following president Omar al-Bashir attempts to “ethnic cleanse” Darfur’s non-Arab region, the UNSC passed Resolution 1556 in 2004 imposing an arms embargo to the region of Darfur. However, following BBC’s investigation within the documentary ‘China’s Secret War – Darfur’, China’s breaches of the arms embargo against Sudan were exposed. Extensive footage revealed that the Chinese government was suppling the Sudanese government with military weapons causing media attention to escalate. Wide-scale media attention subsequently led to an international awareness instigating a change in China’s response, and thus, causing them to comply with the embargo. Due to the flexible nature of the media, the BBC was largely effective in achieving world order by encouraging compliance. Another media response was 2004 BBC documentary, “The New Killing Fields”, exposing the crisis and genocide in Sudan. The documentary caused wide-scale media and international outrage, causing international community to become aware of the government's breach of international law. This pressured international legal responses by UN and US by declaring the conflict genocide in 2005. Subsequently, In 2008, a hybrid UN-AU peacekeeping mission arrived in Darfur, after being authorised by Security Council Resolution 1769 in 2007. Without the contribution of the media, the situation in Darfur may have remained unknown to the international community. Thus, the media has been largely effective at achieving world order through their ability to increase awareness about humanitarian issues Non-legal measures, such as articles and reports, are also largely effective at achieving world order as they expose flaws within the law and pressure reforms. Whilst lacking direct enforceability, articles and reports on Nuclear Non-Proliferation have instigated international discussions. Due to a lack of progress regarding the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) (NPT), many experts expressed the need for legal change through the media. According to a 2016 The Conversation article ‘As the world pushes for a ban on nuclear weapons’, academic Tilman Ruff exposes the lack of responsiveness in international law as “law reform concerning chemical and biological weapons have extraordinarily more rapid in establishing change within international law, when compared to nuclear weapons”. Moreover, Geoffrey Robertson within the 2015 SMH article “Fatal Flaws” discuses the lack of enforceability of the current NPT. This form of media discussion has capabilities in raising awareness of the flaws surrounding the lack of legal responses in relation to the NPT. However, theses recommendations have virtually no enforceability, reflecting the media’s ability to promote world issues, but highlighting how it relies heavily on legal responses to implement recommendations made. Thus, academic articles play no direct involvement in the achievement of world order. In contrast, an example of a case where the media was largely effective in achieving world order is the role of the media in East Timor. The rapidly unfolding situation in East Timor--where anti-independence militias continue to rampage in the capital, Dili, and throughout the province with apparent impunity--provoked an outpouring of editorial comment from East and South Asia, Europe, the Western Hemisphere and Africa. Analysts expressed extreme dismay over the plight of the pro- independence East Timorese, whom they saw as being "abandoned" by the international community as it debates what action to take on East Timor. In particular, ABC Documentary ‘Alias Ruby Blade’ uncovered the extremely significant role of the media in East Timor. According to a 2014 publication by Human Rights Watch “The media played a crucial role in East Timor’s long struggle for independence” as it “instigated action from the UN” and the subsequent deployment of UNAMET forces which eventually brought peace to East Timor. In this way, the media was largely effective at resolving peace and achieving world order. NGO’s have also been largely effective in the obtainment of world order. The ICRC assists in the enactment of the Geneva Conventions, as it treats the sick and wounded in war regardless of which ‘side’ they are on, promoting a stable WO. Australian Aid declared that in 2010, the ICRC had provided health treatment to 5.2 million people and provided economic assistance to 4.9 million people. Australian Aid claims that the ICRC’s “unparalleled access in some of the most fragile countries” make it an effective organisation in the promotion of humanitarian law, thus assisting in the accomplishment of WO. Moreover, the ICG was largely effective in achieving world order in the case of East Timor. The ICG assists the Timor-Leste Government and the UN administration by producing reports on issues that are of vital importance to Timor-Leste’s future peace and security. In particular, the 2009 report ‘No Time For Complacency’, noted that the security situation had dramatically improved since 2008 but that there were still problems with security, the justice system and corruption was still a concern. The report encouraged and recommended assistance from the UN, Australia and the international community. However, the international community has since not responded to the ICG report, suggesting the lack of enforceability and jurisdiction of non-legal measures in achieving world order. Thus, while NGO’s provide an impartial and non-bias resolution to conflict, they lack enforceability and are often rejected. However, the ICRC is largely effective providing greater protection for civilians during the conduct of hostilities. NGO’s can also direct international legal responses and pressure governments into signing and complying with international treaties. In particular, Amnesty was largely effective at putting enormous pressure on governments to sign the Arms Trade Treaty 2013 (ATT). According to Head of Arms Control and Human Rights at Amnesty International, Brian Woods, “The ATT has the potential to save millions of lives” making it “especially alarming when states who have signed or even ratified the treaty seem to think they can continue to supply arms to forces known to commit and facilitate war crimes” that will “contribute to serious human rights violations”. In a mere few years since the treaty was adopted, an impressive 130 states signed it, including 43 states that have signed but not yet ratified. Confounding expectations of some diplomats, a total of 87 states have ratified the treaty so far, including five out of the top ten arms exporters: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. Thus, Amnesty has been largely effective at contributing to the wide-scale adoption of the ATT. However, big arms traders Russia and China have not joined the ATT and have supplied gross violators of human rights. Whilst Amnesty has been played an extremely crucial role in directing state parties to sign the treaty, the NGO lacks essential enforcement as Arms continue to procure from ATT signatories, fuelling bloody civil wars. For example according to 2016 Amnesty Internationals Article, “UN: Zero tolerance for states who flout Arms Trade obligations” in 2014 Ukraine approved the export of 830 light machine guns and 62 heavy machine guns to South Sudan. Only six months after signing the ATT in 2013, authorities in Ukrain also issued an export licence on 19 March 2015 to supply South Sudan with an undisclosed number of operational Mi-24 attack helicopters. Three of those attack helicopters were reported to be in service with South Sudan government forces in the end of 2016. Thus, while Amnesty’s intolerance with Arms Trade has been extremely influential in convincing nation states to refrain from exporting arms, a lack of enforcement has meant that nations states continue to non-comply with the treaty. In this way, non-legal measures have been largely effective at promoting the achievement of world order. The media has played a significant role in increasing awareness of humanitarian issues that would otherwise have been unknown to the international community. Moreover, NGO’s, such as the ICRC have played crucial roles within armed conflicts by protecting civlians, whilst Amnesty has lobbied for the global recognition of the ATT. Despite a lack of enforceability and legal jurisdiction, without the involvement of non-legal responses, world order would be increasingly difficult to achieve as NGO’s and the media place pressure on nations to conduct peaceful relations by instigating legal responses. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download