PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Student’s Name:
Professor’s Name:
Course:
Date:Public International Law
International Law
The subject of international law, and in particular, the origins and definitions of the same, has always been a controversial issue. The predominate reason for this is the sovereignty which is enjoyed by nations all around the world. This, in turn, has resulted in the creation and adoption of laws which apply only to the nations with absolute political backing. Consequently, the public international law attempts to envision a framework for the governance of countries in instances involving altercations between the same. Since every nation has its set of rules which are at times congruent with or in contrast with those of other countries, it became increasingly evident that international law was necessary for the sustenance of peace around the world. In this regard, public international law embodies such international organizations as the United Nations or the International courts. Though such organizations do not have absolute powers over the countries within their jurisdiction, they are evidently useful in the mediation between conflicting nations. This has the considerable duration of time now, aided in the perpetuation of peace and the avoidance of war.
Complexities of International law
A significant shortcoming of international law is that at its foundation, it does not resemble the structure of national justice systems. National justice systems are characterized by such elements such as the courts, which are tasked with the enforcement of the rule of law, legislative elements, which are mandated with the conceptualization and creation of law, and the law enforcement entities such as the police, the federal investigation institutions or intelligence agencies.

As such, public international law is at times considered to lack definitive sources or foundation. This shortcoming is further extenuated by the different means by which the rule of law is enforced in different nations, as it stands as a hurdle towards the arrival of a unified strategy for dealing with a solution to international conflicts. As such, the conflict in itself is not the only thing that needs to be handled, but also the methodology to be employed in the resolution of the same. Evidently, public international law is riddled with complexities, both in their sources as well as in their implementation and owing to this, they ought to be navigated with a considerable amount of diligence.
One particular case which constitutes a complexity in international law is whether or not the international law should violate sovereign borders in the interest of protecting a population. Such instances as mass genocide or political and military instability have for a long time been a bone of contention in the eyes of international law. For instance, the US-led invasion of Iraq has been a controversial issue over the decades. Though the proponents of the invasion cited that the act was aimed at the stabilization of the political environment of the country, which was at the time, in shambles. However, those against the invasion of the country cited that the actions were unethical and completely against the rule of international law which prohibits any country from proceeding within the sovereign borders of another. Public international law, enforced by entities such as the United Nations security council, is also faced with the problem of political and diplomatic agendas which are not in themselves geared towards the ultimate good. As such, since international law is determined, and conceptualized by persons who have variant agendas, they may lean towards the benefit of said diplomats or politicians. This further complicates public international law as both, a true reflection of the interests of society, as well as its usefulness in the resolution of the actual conflict between nations.
The UN Charter and Possible Amendments
The United Nations charter, created in 1945, was meant to be a foundational document for the establishment of comprehensive international law which in turn would serve to enhance coordination between countries and consequently avoid war. In this regard, the charter was formulated by several countries with others joining with time. As such, these subsequent nations are bound to the considerations deliberated upon by the founding states. This has for a substantial amount of time, been viewed as adequate, as the UN charter provisions cover a wide range of aspects and elements of the world. However, recent times have seen considerable political as well as economic changes which in turn, have sparked debate as to whether the provisions of the charter should be altered in order to reflect the same. It is crucial to evaluate the validity of the claims for the alteration of the UN charter provisions in order to ascertain whether they are necessary or not.
Arguments for the Alteration of Charter Provisions
One significant change that ought to be made to the charter provisions is the reference of some countries as enemy states. In today’s political environment, characterized by enhancements in coordination and partnerships, it is difficult to place any country within the title of the enemy. It is also important to consider that doing so antagonized such countries, and by extension, alienates them from both the founding countries as well as the member nations. This phenomenon is unacceptable and goes against efforts aimed towards the conglomeration of countries through the United Nations. To this end, the UN trusteeship Council has also been outdated and to that end, ought to be done away with. The favorability United Nations membership is so substantive that it has resulted to the high amount of membership increase since 1945. As such, any terms that can be construed as estranging goes against the new members.
A second and the perhaps more controversial issue would be amendments proposed towards the intervention and/or non-intervention of conflict within countries. This is particularly with the reference to Articles 51 and 2(4), which pertain to the conditions under which intervention should be attempted or implemented. Some of the proponents for the alterations of the charter would be to alleviate the provisions for invasion by other nations. Nations such as Iraq, and other nations who are for the consideration that each nation should have absolute borders, propose the alteration of the charter in order to strike the relevant provision out. Some have cited that allowing for intervention allows powerful nations to take advantage of the less developed ones. Humanitarian efforts can be used as a veil towards other unethical ends, which is largely a part of the US-led invasion of Iraq. As such, proponents against such invasive actions as foreign intervention cite that the UN charter should be amended to be synonymous with the current economic and political status.
Following the efforts of humanitarian intervention, at times, the UN opts to issue sanctions on said countries. For instance, during the genocide in Rwanda, the UN issued sanctions on the nations, preventing it from trading with other nations. This raises another considerable issue with regard to sovereignty. In current times, no country can be said to be truly independent or sovereign, predominately owing to the fact that the interdependence on each other has created a network that cannot allow a country to survive on its own. As such, some have stated that relinquishing rights towards the imposition of sanctions to the United Nations as providing the organization with an extensive amount of power, which is subject to abuse, if in the wrong hands. The UN members, particularly those who are involved in the Security Council, which comprises the body which exercises the implementation of the sanctions, can use the same towards their own end.
Arguments Against the Alteration of Charter Provisions
Proponents for the maintenance of the charter provisions cite the fact that the charter is open to interpretation as a strong reason not to change anything. The charter comprises of dynamic writing which in turn can be used to evaluate and provide resolution to a wide array of scenarios. Owing to this dynamism, the United Nations charter can effectively be adapted even to current times. A considerable instance of this is the initial consideration of the charter against the use of force against individual nations, which has been adapted to reflect situations which necessitate the use of force. The intervention into a country’s political or economic activities is not justified except for scenarios in which fundamental human rights are being violated. The United Nation’s intervention during the Libya crisis of 2011 was a testament towards the adaptability of the UN charter. The efforts, meant to safeguard innocent civilians against suffering and tyrannous rule, stand as a testament towards the flexibility of the charter.
Arguments against the changing of the charter also cite that due to its extensive scope, it covers all relevant aspects of the world. The charter extenuates the fundamental responsibilities undertaken by the member states, which are to protect the human rights of all peoples everywhere. The UN, as stated in the charter, is meant to protect persons against such actions as are oppressive, or that construe suffering or agony. In this respect, extensive amendments to the charter, could, in turn, result in the alleviation of the core elements which were envisioned by the initial founders. Changing the core elements of the charter’s aims would constitute a gross affront towards the innate intention of the same. As such, the charter does not require amendments as it is still reflective of humanity’s best interest.
Einer and Alto Case Study Analysis
Complexities of Inter-Country Reparation
Resolution of conflict between two uncooperative nations is perhaps one of the most challenging tasks in current times. Whether owing to their history or recent altercations, nations can resist any form of amicable separation. Owing to either nation’s unwillingness to appear as the weaker one, such conflict may stretch out over several years, or even serve as fuel towards the sparking off violence and/or armed conflict. This was the case in the Einer and Alto scenario. The two states are, as evidently warning, both in terms of military efforts, as well as salient conflict. In this regard, before proceeding to evaluate the stance of any current conflict, it is important to seek and establish causal agents toward any previous conflict. This is essential in the determination of the areas in which said countries can or have been in conflict over in order to either steer clear of the same or to attempt to reconcile the same. In the case of countries with a history of military conflicts, it is often increasingly difficult to mediate between them owing to the immeasurable loss suffered by both countries due to the loss of lives during the conflict.
Use of International Courts
However, this being said, it is paramount that the two nations seek out and employ the use of international law in the efforts towards the reparation of the same. In the case of Quinn, the pilot, he ought to be tried in a court which is independent of either Einer or Alto. In this event, the trial will be considered as completely fair for the pilot since the legal system employed will be free from the confines of any nation. The choice of Alto to try the pilot Quinn in secret proceedings is completely against the principles of amicable proceedings in conflict resolution under international law. Furthermore, their actions are indicative of complete bad faith as they carried out the trial in secrecy, in order for their rivals Einer, not be aware of the proceedings. The actions were undertaken by Alto, towards the pilot Quinn, are vindictive and reflective of a nation willing to persecute their opponents with extreme prejudice, even if it means the violation of human rights. Alto is operating in a capacity synonymous with that of war times, and their treatment of Quinn is similar to how a war captive would be treated.
Use of a mediator
In the event that two countries at constantly at loggerheads and more to the point, are unable to arrive at a diplomatic resolution, it is often advisable to bring in outside council on the same. This may be in the form of a neighboring nation which has vested interests in the success and survival of either nation or a completely different entity, outside of the normal operational processes of either country. Mediators are in most cases extremely effective in conflict resolution as they are able to examine the scenario from an unbiased perspective. Furthermore, said mediators are able to provide insight into the possible means of reparation of the two nations, which would be based on the merits of the case rather than any other biased elements. Mediating entities can be in the form of international agencies such as the UN. Mediation allows countries to observe the case as is, other than the fog of bias that would otherwise serve to unhinge the process. Einer and Alto have allowed the conflict that has existed between them in the past, to cloud their current ability to recognize the fact that the venture of pilot Quinn into the airspace of Alto was merely an accident. A mediator could offer insight into the truth of these matters, and in doing so, bring to light the fact that any two neighboring countries require each other in order to live in the content of every aspect5.
Use of a Commonly Deliberated Oversight Committee
One other methodology which could be employed by Einer and Alto in the efforts aimed towards the mediation of the two nations would be the creation of a jointly deliberate committee. In this regard, the committee would comprise of persons from either country, who would be tasked with the deliberation of the case facts and in turn, the creation of a final decision on the matter. In this respect, the joint committee could be tasked with the trial of the Pilot who ventured into enemy airspace. To this end, the committee could ascertain whether or not the Pilot was able to collect or transfer any information which could be construed as being valuable to Einer. As such, if information of this nature of obtained from the wreckage of the plane, it could be concluded that Quinn was indeed on a mission to spy on Alto. It is also paramount to evaluate whether actual efforts were made to contact the pilot were indeed genuine and whether the pilot made efforts to respond to the same. All these facts are checked by the committee and in turn, will be evaluated in the determination of whether Quinn is indeed guilty or not in the eyes of the committee. The seeking of reparation through a joint committee is considerable since such persons will understand the paramount nature by which peace should be treated between the two. Members of the committee, owing to their personal ties to the countries in question, can truly care about, and grasp the gravity of the situation and the consequences of the war between the nations. They also will appreciate the value of coordination and coexistence, as is evident in the trading treaties in place between the two nations, which, in the event that the conflict is not mediated, will suffer a breakdown and eventually collapse, hurting both nations.
References
Public International Law’ (2005) 75 British Yearbook of International Law
Buergenthal T and Murphy S, Public International Law In A Nutshell (1st edn, Thomson/West2007)
‘Charter Of The United Nations | United Nations’ (Un.org, 2016) <http://www.un.org/en/charterunited-nations/> accessed 30 December 2016
Goodrich L, Hambro E and Simons A, Charter Of The United Nations (1st edn, ColumbiaUniversity Press 1969)
Kaczorowska A, Public International Law (1st edn, Routledge-Cavendish 2008)
Pauwelyn J, Conflict Of Norms In Public International Law (1st edn, Cambridge UniversityPress 2003)
Sanger A, ‘Decisions Of British Courts During 2013 Involving Questions Of Public Or PrivateInternational Law: A. Public International Law’ (2014) 84 British Yearbook ofInternational Law
Schrijver N, ‘The Future Of The Charter Of The United Nations’ (2006) 10 Max PlanckYearbook of United Nations Law Online
Simma B and Mosler H, The Charter Of The United Nations (1st edn, Oxford University Press1995)
‘United Nations: Charter Of The United Nations’ (1945) 39 The American Journal ofInternational Law