Hi !
I have an assessment task about world order that requires contemporary regional/global situations that threaten peace and security to answer a question 'Evaluate to what extent legal and non - legal measures have been effective in responding to at least one contemporary regional/global situation that threatens peace and security?'
I have found two issue but I am unsure.
First issue is Omar Al Bashir (who has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide) but is it really an issue that threatens peace and security when he mostly has violated human rights?
Second issue is Russia using veto 8 times to back out of Syrian resolutions,but is veto really a legal measure? If so then under the syllabus, does it just come under 'the United Nations' which is under 'responses to world order' in the syllabus?
Thank you! Apologies if this is too much as a question!
Hi sweetxpple! Welcome to the forums
never too much of a question!
Your second issue is
absolutely one to discuss. And yep, it would come under the UNSC - You'd discuss how the veto power situation has affected the effectiveness of the UNSC in this scenario. You'd probably be saying the response is
ineffective Your first one is a little bit Human Rights-ish, I agree, but you could make it work. World Order is about discussing cooperation and compliance, and clearly the Bashir issue is an example of the limited effectiveness of that cooperation (the ICC has had a warrant for his arrest for like 8 years now)
If you are in need of another issue/case study, use North Korea! Lots of evidence for essays there since tensions really flared up a few years ago
hope this helped! Really hope this community can be useful for you