Effective World Order and Its Importacne

“Woe to the statesman whose arguments for entering a war are not as convincing at its end as they were at the beginning,” Is a quote from the famous secretary of state Henry Kissinger. Conflict involving war, and world order play a major part in the current global environment. World order refers to global circumstances, influenced by the World Powers, and the system of controlling global events, generally through established international arrangements, required for preserving global political stability. In recent years, high levels of interdependence resulted from globalisation has increased the need for world order. There are two noteworthy kinds of contention which represent a danger to the upkeep of the world in our 21st-century world; interstate and intrastate clashes. Interstate clashes allude to that, for example, regular war, atomic fighting and digital fighting, with a contemporary case of interstate clash being the South China Sea; and intrastate clash, which alludes to clashes, for example, common war, guerrilla fighting, coup's, fear mongering and slaughters. A further contemporary case of intrastate clash is the Syrian clash. Different reasons cause struggles in the maintenance of World Order, these include cultural attitudes; causing the recent spate of terrorist attacks on the global community, aspirations for territory; such as in the South China Sea and aspirations for power.

So why do we need world order? There are several key reasons why we must maintain effective world order, both to prevent negative and encourage positive repercussions. Firstly and most importantly, global destruction may eventuate due to world conflict through a failure in the maintenance of World Order; this may come as means of nuclear or other warfare, furthermore, global issues such as warming may not be adequately addressed and therefore leading to the destruction of our globe, and globalisation, and a sense of mutualism. World order is also extremely important and reliant on recognising the economic and social benefits posed by interdependence, and therefore states make efforts towards cooperation leading to international law growing exponentially with a higher degree of compliance. With the growing reliance on the maintenance of world order being recognised by the world Superpowers, many legal measures have been implemented in direct response to events such as the South China Sea and terrorism, but also in broader acceptance of the need for maintenance.

The United Nations formed in 1945 and fondly referred to as the UN; is the peak of international law and responsible for the unanimous protection of World Order. It has a primary objective to provide concrete guidelines about how peace might be achieved and maintained. Kofi Annan states that “The effectiveness of the UN relies on high-level political support and partnerships between governments” and this further reflects the importance of world order. However the UN, like many legal responses to threats to world order, has its shortfalls, with no international body to ensure enforcement if states do not ratify proposed bills. Such as the UNCLOS relating to the South China Sea

The interstate conflict regarding the disruption of world order in the South China Sea is both significant and extensive; but why has conflict arisen in the region? The South China Sea (SCS) plays a major role in Indo-Pacific geopolitics, bordering Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and most notably Vietnam and China. This large selection of Industrial capitals means that the SCS contributes significantly as a commercial gateway for the World’s merchant shipping. This cements its relevance as an important economic and strategic sub-region of the Indo-Pacific. Where the disruption of world order arises is over the competition of the sovereignty of small islands and features. Creating a source of longstanding tension and distrust. The first act of aggression arose from China, unsurprising to no-one. This occurred in January of 1974; when it forced South Vietnam from the Crescent Islands. 

In March of 1988, The Chinese Navy engaged in contact with the Vietnamese Navy, resulting in the Chinese Occupation of seven ISlands in the Spratlys, and furthermore has been asserting greater control over faraway waters that had previously been considered international. The results of China’s aggression in the SCS is the dredging of several islands across the Spratly’s, dredging by the Chinese has been piling silt on top of the reefs, raising it above sea level to allow for the creation of an airfield which is approximately 3,000 metres in length. This airfield would act as a basing point for Chinese air forces that with support for its coast guard, would be able to threaten Vietnam and intimidate the Philippines. There has been the implementation of various legal measures with varying degrees of effectiveness in order to subdue aggression in the SCS; with the main legal measure including the intervention of the United Nations (UN). The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was a treaty proposed by the Security Council which came into effect in 1994. It establishes the legal framework, which intends to balance the interests of coastal states with those states that are maritime based; both economically and security wise. “UNCLOS enshrines the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), a 200 nautical mile area that extends sole exploitation rights to coastal nations over marine resources. However, the EEZ was never intended to serve as a security zone, and UNCLOS also guarantees wide-ranging passage rights for naval vessels and military aircraft.” stated by the Royal Institute of International Affairs. It creates an interdependence of nations with obligations affecting all marine areas and activities. The UNCLOS is fairly ineffective as a UN measure to prevent the disruption of world order in the SCS region, as it relies on universal acceptance like all UN bills and treaties. Although the Convention's language appears to require both parties and non-parties to the Convention, the Convention does not automatically generate privileges or responsibilities for third members under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. While most of the convention is currently applicable as customary international law, the lack of complete, universal acceptance of the convention will leave the legal order intended by the UNCLOS without its full effectiveness, therefore leaving the institutions of the convention powerless. 

Other legal measures have indeed been implemented in the region to prevent the disruption of world order but have been fairly insignificant and therefore un-effective in order to prevent the flaring or tensions in the region. One intervention though, includes the involvement of the United States Navy, to patrol waters that are considered international territory and the backing of mediation efforts. While these efforts have been effective in limiting the current arising of conflict, They are ineffective due to the limitations of the UN because of its status as soft law, and because of that, the waters in the South China sea are still dangerous as well as the threat to the maintenance of World Order, due to Chinese mobilisation and aggression.

The Syrian conflict is an example of an Intrastate conflict that borders on that of an interstate, posing a major contemporary threat to the preservation of world order. The Arab springs uprising marks the beginning of the Syrian conflict in March of 2011. This was in response to the oppressive Bashar al-Assad regime; where he was encouraged to undertake democratic reforms in the region. Instead, his response was violence. The main conflict arose between military defectors and protestors against the government, which by 2012 developed into a fully established civil war. As it stands over 465000 Syrians have been killed with over 12 million displaced persons. Though it was originally an intrastate war, international involvement has played a large role in the evolution of the Syrian civil war. Turning it into an interstate proxy war through legal and non-legal intervention in the region in order to prevent the failure of the bonds of world order. Following the outbreak of the civil war in March 2011, the international community responded by censuring the Syrian government for the blatant violations of Human Rights Aggressive legal intervention through the Right 2 Protect movement has involved the US coalition arming anti-Assad rebel groups, involved in bombing ISIL targets since 2014. Further responses have included Israel carrying out air raids inside Syria, reportedly targeting Hezbollah and military facilities. Following the outbreak of violence during March 2011, the international community responded by censuring the Syrian government for its widespread violations of human rights. Further action was taken by the United Nations to varying degrees of effectiveness in preserving world order in the Syrian region. The Church of Israel, UN Secretary-General and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called for intervention by the International Criminal Court (ICC). 

Despite this, the Security Council and ICC have failed to adequately respond. Several resolutions passed by the UNSC in regards to the events in Syria refer to the government's responsibility to protect populations, but none have been fully implemented due to the lack of complete, universal acceptance of the resolution, similar to that of the previously discussed UNCLOS. This is alongside Russia and China, who have jointly vetoed six draft resolutions proposed by the UNSC and Russia has independently vetoed a further six resolutions due to the preservation of their own interests in the country, in regards to oil, human resources and land. On 13 December the UNSC adopted Resolution 2449, renewing authorization of the delivery of humanitarian aid across borders and lines of conflict until 10 January 2020. On 21 December 2016, the UN General Assembly voted to establish an International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) to assist in the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators of atrocities in Syria. The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect reported that “on 12 February three former Syrian secret service officers were arrested in Germany and France on allegations of torture and crimes against humanity, marking the first major arrests in Europe of members of the Syrian government under the principle of universal jurisdiction”. 

All these legal measures, as well as the ones regarding the United Nations, have thus far proved ineffective in maintaining world order and tensions continue to grow between nation-states as the threat to their interests in the Syrian state continues. This is due to firstly and mainly to non-compliance in order to protect interests. And secondly to the restrictions on international law as a mechanism of intervention.