The United Nations Security Council, as highest custodian of peace and security in the international community, is subjected to change in the international environment, but is in itself not inclined to, or likely to change in the near future. This is because its structure is entrenched in international law, which also upholds the pre-eminence of state sovereignty in the prevailing international relations environment. The pre-eminent position bestowed upon the UNSC by the UN Charter and an entrenched international adherence to its current structure, mainly due to conflict’s close association with reality politics and international power structures associated with a pre-dominant interest driven international system of states, make international consensus on changing the UNSC near impossible. This environment is, therefore, subject to the competitive pursuit of state interests and influenced by power relations, as Realists contend. However, this behavioural nature of the international system continues to be challenged in order to conform to the principles that underwrite the philosophies, the theories and the structures of human rights, humanitarian principles, idealism and their correlating systems of law in democracy. South Africa’s diplomatic positioning in this regard since 1994 assumes a structural approach by calling for change in the international system, to broaden international community, and specifically African, contributions to and participation in global governance. As concerns the UNSC, the South African diplomatic agenda has targeted the ingrained hegemony of the Council’s permanent core, the Permanent Five, and their veto. In theory, South Africa subscribes to the Ezulwini Consensus, which is a common African position that demands two permanent seats for the continent. The country has, in line with its diplomatic endeavour, also pronounced itself ready to assume such a seat in a transformed Council, even though Africa has not collectively endorsed (a) candidate(s). In the interim, South Africa is using strategic diplomatic manoeuvres, at the regional as well as global level, to steer the debate on UNSC reform and to lobby for its own permanent inclusion. South Africa, therefore, conducts diplomacy of engagement across the international diplomatic spectrum in support of a diplomacy that seeks to engage rather than isolate or disengage and which is aimed at making a difference in this mediation, creating convergence, also through bridging divergences in the international debate on reform of the UNSC. / Dissertation (MDIPS)--University of Pretoria, 2013. / lmchunu2014 / Political Sciences / unrestricted

The thesis purports to assess the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in maintaining international peace and security and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in prosecuting individuals who have committed severe violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international law, during humanitarian and counter-terrorism operations. The thesis endeavours to highlight the failures of both institutions, firstly, the UNSC being unable to fulfil its institutional mandate, which is mainly attributed to the abuse of veto privileges granted to the five permanent members (P5). This has effectively allowed individuals from the militaries of the P5 and their allies elude criminal liability, promoting a culture of impunity. The UNSC’s failure to prevent P5 members use of unauthorised military force in pursuing counter-terrorism operations and interpose expeditiously in humanitarian crises, have also contributed to the erosion of the institutions’ legitimacy, which is further perpetuated by the USA’s continued ‘War on Terror’ doctrine after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Secondly, the ICC’s inability to prosecute individuals for crimes under the Rome Statute will also be highlighted as the principle of complementarity and the court’s inability to enforce arrest warrants are significant factors contributing to the institutions inability to administer international criminal justice. The thesis draws upon practical examples to substantiate the failures of both institutions by referring to the conflicts in: Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Syria and Libya. Before concluding the UNSC and the ICC have become futile, the thesis will then make recommendations for reform and propose a novel solution to restore legitimacy back to both institutions.

The analysis of the rules evolution, in particular internationally, demonstrates normative and principles conflicts that serve as power play instrument and the colonizer-colonized dichotomy, even when its essence is directed to the maintenance of peace. The the Responsibility While protecting (RWP) presented by Brazil in 2011, within the context of the development of global standards, permeated by non-linear conflictual interactions, where the interventions based on a Responsibility to Protect(R2P) civilians, have challenged the existing structures in the global order and therefore has sparked great debate regarding the prevalence of decisions emanating from the United Nations Security Council - UNSC against the sovereignty and self-determination of peoples, since there is no control of legality and legitimacy of that discretion which the United Nations - UN holds. In this sense, the present work aims to analyze if the Responsibility to Protect can be considered as an attempt to influence from the Global South countries in the production of global standards and this can work as a capable principle of safeguarding the coercive nature of measures by of the UNSC, a way of accountability that implies a large extent by the level of responsibility of emanating acts from the UN Security Council that determ interventions, and what tools are needed for the Responsibility to Protect is an effective tool of prior control of legality and legitimacy. In order to meet this goal, we adopted a dialectical approach, drawing on the monographic method, through bibliographical and documentary research and interdisciplinary literature, among others that apply to the subject under study. / A análise da evolução das normas, em específico no âmbito internacional, demonstra conflitos normativos e principiológicos que servem de instrumento de reprodução de poder e da dicotomia colonizador-colonizado, mesmo quando sua essência está voltada para a manutenção da paz. O Princípio da Responsabilidade ao Proteger (RWP, sigla em inglês), apresentado pelo Brasil em 2011, surge no contexto da evolução das normas globais, permeadas por interações não lineares conflituosas, onde a implementação cada vez maior de intervenções baseadas em uma Responsabilidade de Proteger (R2P, sigla em inglês) civis, tem desafiado as estruturas existentes na ordem global e por isso tem suscitado grande debate no que toca a prevalência de decisões emanadas do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas - CSNU face à soberania e a autodeterminação dos povos, uma vez que não há um controle de legalidade e legitimidade desse poder discricionário do qual a Organização das Nações Unidas - ONU é detentora. Nesse sentido, a presente dissertação visa analisar se a Responsabilidade ao Proteger pode ser considerada como uma tentativa de influência a partir dos países do Sul Global na produção de normas globais e se esta pode funcionar como um princípio capaz de acautelar as medidas de natureza coercitiva por parte do CSNU, isto é, uma forma de accountability que implique em um maior nível de responsabilidade por parte dos atos emanados do Conselho de Segurança da ONU que determinem intervenções, bem como quais são os instrumentos necessários para que a Responsabilidade ao Proteger seja uma ferramenta eficaz de controle prévio de legalidade e legitimidade. De forma a cumprir esse objetivo, adotou-se uma abordagem dialética, valendo-se do método monográfico, por meio de pesquisa bibliográfica e documental e literatura especializada interdisciplinar, dentre outras que aplicáveis ao tema em estudo.

This thesis explores the pressing need for reform within the United Nations Security Council, a key organization in global governance, in the form of a case study. The main purpose of the research is to understand how its reform could enhance its legitimacy while attending to the possible opposition from the USA, China, and Russia. It encompasses historical information, from the League of Nations to the reform proposals throughout history, culminating in the present debates, as well as useful theoretical approaches for the analysis. Through the Syrian Civil War, it describes the Council struggle to handle contemporary geopolitical issues. The insights of the Intergovernmental Negotiations Framework and the Elements Paper are crucial to research the current reform debates, and other literature from scholars, International Organizations and media are also employed. The analysis investigates the research question and hypothesis, and the conclusion helps summarize the findings. The thesis serves as a call for a better articulated Security Council that can better confront the complexities of our multipolar world with effectivity and effectiveness.