Question Topic: UN Security Council
1. The UN Security Council has succeeded in establishing itself as the prime guardian of international peace after the Cold War, however, its effectiveness has been mixed. This “prime” position must be considered in light of the fact that there is no other international body that has any perceived legitimacy to negotiate on issues of war and peace. The Security Council is unique in that, from a legal perspective, member states have given up elements of their own state power by consenting to be bound to Security Council resolutions. In exchange, member states believe they will receive more security and protection than otherwise possible. This legal legitimacy to negotiate on international security issues is not shared by any other institution. Empirical evidence shows that intrastate conflicts have fallen since the end of the Cold War (pg. 158) and that “’peace lasts substantially longer when international personnel deploy than when states are left to maintain peace on their own’” (pg. 159). As intrastate conflicts have fallen, UN peacekeeping operations have risen inversely (pg. 156). Security Council approval or disapproval has the effect of influencing world opinion on whether or not an action or intervention by a member state is legitimate or not (pg. 150). Nonetheless, UN sanctions have often proved ineffective in controlling the aggressive actions of member states. Peacekeeping failures in Rwanda and Somalia are often cited as