Liaison Newsletter > LIAISON Vol. 3, No. 2, March 1999 - Articles

« Return to Liaison Vol. 3, No. 3 Index

Kosovo and the Use of Force

The UN Security Council was established in 1945 as the principal arbitrator and decision-maker on matters that require the international use of force to deal with acts of aggression or threats to the peace. The Cold War undermined this function, but since 1990, the Council has authorized the use of force by particular member states against Iraq, Yugoslavia and Haiti, and in Somalia and Central Africa.

In the case of Kosovo, while the Council has agreed to an arms embargo, there has been no explicit authorization to use force against Yugoslavia. The rationale for such use of force by NATO members, given the failure of that government to comply with UN and NATO demands, is difficult to deny.

Yet, one would hope that members of the Council, including Canada, would request it to meet to consider the matter before the use of force took place. Russia or China, or both, might well veto the use of force, but at least the rules of the Charter would have been observed, and the rationale for NATO to act alone would have been better understood.

The wider question of UN authority still needs to be raised, however; should the Charter system of security be ignored whenever convenient to those with the means and the will to force, or should it be revised to reflect the world of 2000, not 1945?

The early years of the UN, recourse was had to the General Assembly after vetoes stymied action by the Council. This procedure may now be too cumbersome and too unlikely to lead to decisions. If so, the alternative is to amend the Charter, both by adding new seats to the Council so as to make it more representative of the membership, and by restricting the use of the veto. Such measures will not be taken soon. But if we wish the use of force to be subject to the rule of law, they have to be pursued.