Latest in U.N. Security Council
As it currently stands, the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit is poised to put justice for victims and accountability for atrocity crimes on the backburner and perpetuate trends that stagnate progress on the continent.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has triggered an unprecedented rollout of sanctions from the international community. What does it mean for the future of sanctions practice?
Can the Russian Federation be legally removed from the United Nations? The conventional wisdom says no. This post offers a basis for saying yes.
As the Security Council deliberates possible action on Ukraine, the question of abstention nonetheless looms large: Does the U.N. Charter require Russia to abstain on a resolution concerning Ukraine and, if so, could the United States effectively pressure it to do so?
The United Nations Security Council held an emergency session at 10 a.m. on Jan. 31 to discuss threats to international peace and security caused by the buildup of Russian military personnel along the Ukrainian border.
With this U.N. Security Council vote, the U.S. has made good on a promise included in the peace agreement with the Taliban. But many are skeptical of the deal.
In its public statements and actions, the Chinese government consistently has supported a restrictivist reading of the U.N. Charter that limits the use of military force against another state to situations of self-defense or with authorization of the U.N. Security Council. In research I have been doing for a larger project on China’s use of international law, I have found no instances of the Chinese government’s departure from this legal principle.