the Charter was written, and since then have become entrenched in UN work norms and international rhetoric. They are supported by a series of GeneralAssemblyresolutions,
such as the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace from 1984 and the
Declaration of the International Year of Peace from 1985.19 Historian Akira
Iriye views these objectives as an additional stage in the development of the
vision of a global community of nations with a unique ‘international culture’,
with common economic, social, humanitarian, ethical and intellectual values.
struggle against colonialism, in the UN GeneralAssemblyResolution on the
use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of people to self-determination. This resolution, which has been
passed on an annual basis since 1986 (2005 being the exception), recognizes
Romantic narratives in international politics
that the activities of mercenaries are contrary to fundamental principles of international law, such as non-interference in the internal affairs of States, territorial integrity and independence, and seriously
External Relations Files, Memo on the outcome of the first
meeting of the Congo Advisory Committee from the Indian Delegation in New York
to Foreign, New Delhi, 26 August 1960.
24 Bring, ‘Dag Hammarskjöld and the issue of humanitarian intervention’,
25 UNA, S-0856–0001–05, United Nations Offices for Special Political Affairs, GeneralAssemblyResolution 1654 (XVI) –Committee on Implementation of Declaration on
Granting Independence to Colonial Peoples 1961–1969.
26 Hammarskjöld also had formal advisory groups for previous crises in Suez and
international criminal court in the 1960s. P. Marquardt, ‘Law without borders: the constitutionality of an international criminal court’, Columbia J Transnat’l Law, 33 (1995), 73–148, p. 87, comments on the work of academics in the 1970s. B. Graefrath, ‘Universal criminal jurisdiction and an international criminal court’, EJIL, 1 (1990), 67–88, p. 71, comments on the work of NGOs in the 1970s.
7 GeneralAssemblyResolution (GA Res.) 3314 (XXIX), 14 December 1974.
8 See the 1996 ILC Draft Code.
voted for a Security Council resolution on 9 June, calling
for Portugal to end colonialism.94 This was highly significant. The US publicly supported Angolan independence, much to the annoyance of Portugal, Britain and France,
who abstained. The resolution also drew on GeneralAssemblyResolution 1514 and
directly condemned the repressive measures of the Portuguese authorities in Angola.
It employed the language and terminology of the Committee of 24 in pointing to
Portugal’s responsibilities regarding non-self-governing territories. It was interpreted
unrealistic they might be’.79
The actions of newly independent nations on the Committee of 24 in implementing GeneralAssemblyResolution 1514 from 1961 onwards increased the impression
among British Foreign Office officials of the UN as an unwieldy and unpredictable
organisation that had been converted into ‘an organ of the anti-colonial movement,
a kind of Holy Alliance in reverse’.80 The embittered rhetoric from imperial internationalists, such as one of the leading British scholars of International Relations in the
1960s, Martin Wight, about the dismantling of the
provided in Menon’s resolution’. Eden agreed
that the British could not either, but he stressed the importance of not
changing Menon’s resolution so much that Menon might be unable to vote
for it himself. When Acheson warned Eden that he might have to choose
between ‘our vote or the Indian vote’, the Foreign Secretary replied ‘that
in that case he wanted ours’. This led Acheson to speculate to Truman:
‘I think we may be able to work this out.’ It was clear that a GeneralAssemblyresolution would have to be based on the Menon draft, ‘but I
believe we shall be able to get
the North Korean authorities, that the hostilities in Korea constituted
a civil war and as such were domestic matters with which the United
Nations should not interfere under Article 2 (7) of the Charter. In the
view of His Majesty’s Government this was a misrepresentation of the
true state of affairs. A full reply to these arguments was given by Attlee
in the House of Commons debate of 5 July where he pointed out that, on
the one hand the Government of South Korea had been recognised by the
United Nations in the GeneralAssemblyResolution of 12 December, 1948,
más’: The Report of the Argentine National Commission on the Disappeared (CONADEP), 1984, Recommendations and Conclusions, available at: < http://www.nuncamas.org/index2.htm >, and see ‘Guatemala: memory of silence’, Commission for Historical Clarification, Conclusions and Recommendations, para. 89, available at: < http://hrdata.aaas.org/ceh/report/english/toc.html >.
358 GeneralAssemblyResolution (GA Res.) 47/133, 18 December 1992, and see R. Brody and F. González, ‘ Nunca más: an analysis of international instruments on “disappearances”’, HRQ, 19 (1997), 365
This chapter discusses Article 8(2)(b) of the Rome Statute. It covers the origins and development of Article 8(2)(b)(i) Attacking civilians; Article 8(2)(b)(ii) Attacking civilian objects; Article 8(2)(b)(iii) Attacking personnel or objects involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission; Article 8(2)(b)(iv) Excessive incidental death, injury or damage; Article 8(2)(b)(v) Attacking undefended places; Article 8(2)(b)(vi) Killing or wounding a person hors de combat; Article 8(2)(b)(vii) Improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions; Article 8(2)(b)(viii) Deportation or transfer of population; Article 8(2)(b)(ix) Attacking protected objects; Article 8(2)(b)(x) Mutilation or medical or scientific experimentation; Article 8(2)(b)(xi) Treacherously killing or wounding; Article 8(2)(b)(xii) Denying quarter; Article 8(2)(b)(xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property; Article 8(2)(b)(xiv) Depriving nationals of the hostile party of rights or actions; Article 8(2)(b)(xv) Compelling participation in enemy military operations; Article 8(2)(b)(xvi) Pillaging; Article 8(2)(b)(xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; Article 8(2)(b)(xviii) Employing prohibited gases, liquids, materials or devices; Article 8(2)(b)(xix) The use of expanding bullets; Article 8(2)(b)(xx) Employing weapons, projectiles or materials or methods of warfare to be listed in an annex to the Statute; Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity; Article 8(2)(b)(xxii) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilisation, or sexual violence; Article 8(2)(b)(xxiii) Using protected persons as shields; Article 8(2)(b)(xxiv) Attacking objects or persons using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions; Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) Starvation as a method of warfare; and Article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) Using, conscripting or enlisting children.