Introduction
In the case presented within the exercise, country BRAVO experiences terrorist pressure from a militant organization based in the neighboring country, ALPHA. Considerations of similar, real-life, and fictional cases are important, as the process of mediating conflict between both state and non-state actors, terrorist groups, is extremely difficult (Ratner, 2002). Due to the combination of factors, including the group’s (DOR) political standing in its home state, Ethnic minority support, and complications of international law, BRAVO has been unable to counteract or stop attacks on its sovereignty and citizenry.
The main goal of DOR is to secure a position of power in BRAVO and reinstate government structures that are found to be more advantageous. Currently, the organization has a number of BRAVO citizens taken hostage, with all attempts at their release or de-escalation proving fruitless. As a result of these developments, the country has decided to preemptively invade the country ALPHA and free its people. This action has sparked international controversy, with other nations in the area reacting appropriately, focusing on ensuring the safety of their people and successful evacuation.
Table of Authorities (TOA)
Charter of the United Nations
Chapter VII — Action with respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression
- Article 39
- Article 41
Statement of Facts
Day of Revenge (DOR) is a transnational non-state actor, presenting both political and military interests. Country ALPHA serves as their primary base of operations, with major stakes in local government and possessing representatives. The organization has significant backing from ethnic minority groups in both nations, who want their desires to be represented in government. DOR took active military action against BRAVO, initiating terrorist attacks and other forms of violent influence, culminating in the murder of many BRAVO citizens and an emergent hostage situation. The demands of the DOR for hostage release are not being met, while the organization uses ALPHA and BRAVO citizens to protect its centers of operation. BRAVO considers this action to be a violation of its national freedom and sovereignty.
Argument
Security Council Should Take an Active Role in Mediating and Resolving the Situation
According to the Charter of the United Nations, Chapter VII, Article 39 – the UN Security council’s role is to determine any threats to global threats, or acts of aggression, and devise measures in order to eliminate them.
Approval of the Use of Armed Force is Necessary to Resolve the Conflict, Self Defense is prohibited
According to the Charter of the United Nations, Chapter VII, Article 41 – the Security Council has the power and influence required in order to direct other nations to use force in order to resolve the conflict. Furthermore, according to the organization’s policies, a nation can be justified in using force for self-defense, justifying the military action of BRAVO on ALPHA’s territory (Taft, 2004). Considering the inability of peaceful dialogue with the DOR, the use of armed force is left as the primary way to ensure the safety of BRAVO and ALPHA citizens.
Claims of a Justified Invasion onto ALPHA Territory Must be Examined
According to the report, BRAVO resorted to the use of armed force only after other attempts at negotiation or conflict resolution failed, making the attempt more justifiable in the eyes of the legal system. However, the concept of preemptive self-defense should be further investigated by non-state affiliated authorities. The idea of preemptive violence as a protection mechanism is highly controversial, likely contributing to political and international instability (Reisman & Armstrong, 2006). The UN council must work to analyze and evaluate BRAVO’s actions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the escalating tensions between DOR, BRAVO, and ALPHA have contributed to the creation of a dangerous global conflict, one that can potentially affect other nations as well. While some states were found to be collaborating with DOR, Security Council has taken it upon itself to mediate the situation and respond adequately. It is within the interests of both nations and the UN Security Council that the situation is taken under control at a reasonable pace, in order to promote safety, security, and freedom in the region.
References
Ratner, S. R. (2002). Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello after September 11. American Journal of International Law, 96(4), 905-921.
Reisman, W. M., & Armstrong, A. (2006). The past and future of the claim of preemptive self-defense. American Journal of International Law, 100(3), 525-550.
Taft, W. (2002). International Law and the Use of Force. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 36(3).