1. EVALUATE TE EFFECTIVENESS O0046 LEGAL AND NON LEGAL REPSONSES IN RESOLVING CONFLICT
AND WORKING TOWARDS WORLD ORDER
World order is defined as the activities and relationships between the world’s states and other
significant non-state global actors that occur within a legal, political and economic framework, and thus
implies a requisite level of international peace and stability. Non legal measures such as the media, and
political negotiations, in addition to legal measures of the UN Security Council have to varying degrees
been effective in working towards achieving world order.
Political negotiation is the simplest, and most frequently used non-legal measure to resolve differences
nations peacefully and diplomatically. It can be instrumental in providing a peaceful preventative
resolution to threats against world order, whilst maintaining diplomacy between States.
However, political negotiations are not always effective, due to the lack of political will of parties,
epitomized in the Six Party Talks between North & South Korea and the Permanent Five aimed at finding
a peaceful resolution prompted by security concerns over North Koreas(DPRK) withdrawal from the
Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty in 2006. In a 2005 Joint Agreement, DPRK agreed to abandon all
nuclear weapons programs, however progress towards achieving world order retrograded by the 2006
missile test.
However through China’s diplomatic pressure, the nuclear crisis came to a head, as members outlined a
denuclearization plan, and DPRK shut its main nuclear plant in Yongbyeon. Again, tensions heightened
after the alleged sinking of the South Korean Navy Ship Cheonbeon and the shelling of Yeongpyeong in
2009. Nonetheless political negotiations continued resulting in a “leap day agreement”, under which
Pyongyang agreed to place a moratorium on its nuclear and long-range missile tests in return for
240,000 tons of food aid provided by the US to alleviate the chronic food shortages and looming
humanitarian crisis, from which 1/3 of the population is suffering from according to Amnesty
International. However, again, progress towards a more stable world order was jeopardized with
DPRK’s satellite launch, reportedly disguised as a long range missile, according to a BBC article on 13th
April 2011 “ North Korea rocket launch fails”.
Thus the nuclear crises posed by DPRK’s nuclear proliferation highlights how political negotiations are
effective to the extent nation states exercise political will to respond to world order issues, and aren’t
always effective, demonstrated by the breakdown in Six Party Talks to address the nuclear threat posed
by the hostile state.
The media plays a crucial non-legal role in the maintenance of world order. Traditional forms of media
and the emergence of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube has mainly facilitated the
globalization serving as venues for the expression of dissent, dissemination of information, and
collective action whilst promoting social, economic and political development.
The media can be very influential in regulating, maintaining, and preserving world order, highlighted in
their paramount role in the Libyan uprising as part of the “Arab Spring”. In the initial days of protests,
citizens of Benghazi began collecting and documenting the brutal crackdowns and violence committed

2. by security forces against anti-government protesters, allowing the outside world to witness the
brutality of the regime. Consequent widespread condemnation from the international community,
created an impetus for UN Security Council action through Resolution 1973 to establish a no fly zone
and allow intervention under the principle Responsibility to Protect. Thus the media played an effective
and indispensible role in raising awareness to a deteriorating humanitarian situation, and regional
threat, provoking an international response to address the threat to world order.
However, conversely the role of media can also have negative ramifications on world order, as media
tends to show the drama, or violence of conflicts, with little exploration of the issues behind the surface.
Furthermore, media coverage of tragedys in world order can often result in ‘compassion fatigue’
meaning people become immune to the suffering as a consequence of overexposure. Therefore, the
media has only to a certain extent been effective in their response to world order, subject to various
limitations.
The UN Security Council (UNSC)is the principle organs of the United Nations, bestowed with the
responsibility under Article 1 UN Charter to maintain international peace and security, resolve
international problems of economic, social or humanitarian nature, and to facilitate friendly relations
between nations states to strengthen universal peace . Their role often involves responding to crises
around the world on a case-by-case basis by using their powers also outlined in the United Nations
Charter, which includes the power to establish peacekeeping operations, international sanctions, and
authorize military action.
The UNSC represents the most authoritive legal response in achieving world order, with the power to
issue legally binding resolutions on UN members (which includes every international recognized state
except the Vatican City) if made with respect to Chapter VII UN Charter to maintain or restore
international peace and security. Their effectiveness in achieving world order is further augmented by
Article 25 of the UN Charter compelling UN members to accept and carry out decisions of the UNSC,
demonstrated in the Libyan Uprising in 2011, as a product of the “Arab Spring”.
In response to the escalating violence and deteriorating humanitarian situation in Libya, as Muammar
Gaddafi’s forces launched a brutal crackdown involving firing live ammunition at anti-government
protestors, the UNSC passed Resolution 1973, demanding an immediate ceasefire , authorizing the
international community to establish a no fly zone and to use all means necessary (except foreign
occupation), to protect civilians, under the principle of “Responsibility to Protect”.
NATO, an intergovernmental military alliance consisting of 28 members across North America and
Europe, responded swiftly to Resolution 1973 under the mission dubbed “Operation Unified Protector”
according to the NATO website involving the policing of the arms embargo, patrolling the no-fly zone
and protecting civilians. In addition NATO intervention provided air strikes, weapons, and military
training to rebel forces, facillitating the violent development NTC. The ensuing formation of militias and
access to arms prevented NTC’s early defeat, and subdued by pro-Gadaffi loyalists. Through the backing
of extensive NATO air raids, Libyan rebels were able to capture territory, and ultimately swarm Gaddafi’s

3. compound in Tripoli six months after fighting began. A few days later on the 20th of October, following
the death Colonel Gaddafi, NTC declares Libya to be officially “liberated”.
Although the legality of NATO’s actions are contested amongst experts, it nonetheless illustrates the
effectiveness of the UNSC’s power to empower the international community to collectively respond to
global and regional threats to world order.
However, the UNSC’s ability to deliver an effective response to maintain world order is severely limited
by state sovereignty codified in the Montevideo Convention (1933), and the lack of political will
members of the international community. This is demonstrated by North Korea’s development of a
nuclear weapons programme, regardless of jus cogens, and UNSC Resolutions 1718 , 1874, and 1985
which imposed a series of political, economic, and commercial sanctions on the already isolated state, in
an effort to curb financial inflows, targeting the country’s military enterprise elite and nuclear weapons
programme, according to the paper “North Korea’s second nuclear test: implications of U.N Security
Council” on 12th February , 2012.
There is a general consensus amongst experts and scholars who believe sanctions against the regime
have been ineffective in economically penalizing North Korea. For example, Resolution 1718, passed in
2006 contained very limited provisions, and lacked a defined list of prohibited goods to be traded with
the hostile state according to a 2008 report “North Korea’s Security Policy”. Instead, lists of prohibited
goods were left to individual countries , who were to report to the UN Sanctions Committee, effectively
allowing countries to avoid or soften implementation of the resolution, limiting the effectiveness of legal
measures in working towards world order.
China accounts for more than 90% of the state’s energy imports, and 45% of much needed food aid for
an impoverished nation, and thus plays an imperative role in ensuring the effectiveness of UNSC
resolutions in responding to threats to world order. However, the lack of political will on China’s behalf
has seriously impeded the North Korea’s nuclear disarmament by showing little regard, and taking a
minimalist approach to sanctions placed upon the hostile state. For example, exports from China to
North Korea actually increased by 48% in 2009, regardless of economic sanctions imposed by Resolution
1874, according to analysis conducted by the Peterson Institute.
In addition, the UNSC’s powers are severely limited by the exercise of veto from the Five Permanent
Members, which severely limits its ability to work towards responding to regional and global threats to
world order, demonstrating that effective response to world order require the unison and political will
of the international community.
Thus the non legal measures from political negotiations and the media can be effective to a certain
extent, whilst effectiveness of legal responses from the UNSC vary upon cases, demonstrated by its
responses to North Korea’s nuclear proliferation, and humanitarian crisis in Libya. Nevertheless, unity
and open diplomacy of actors in the international community, whilst still respecting state sovereignty is
crucial to advance measures undertaken towards achieving world order.
Notes

4. Use more links to each of responses
Use dates of media articles
Conclusion – weigh up whats effective & the extent effectiveness. Use examples.
Put more links to question
Find definition of world order from someone else
use more
UN Security Council is a principle actor in undertaking legal responses to achieve world order, bestowed
the power to commit measures involving threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of
aggression to maintain or restore international peace and security.
and has the potential to be a very effective legal measure to achieve world order through their authority
to refer cases to the International Criminal Court, as it did in Libya and Darfur, under the Rome Statute of
the ICC where it couldn’t exercise jurisdiction.