Countermeasures under the law of state responsibility

Countermeasures Under the Law of State Responsibility

Who is entitled to adopt countermeasures under the law of state responsibility? Discuss with reference to recent state practice.

Throughout history, the responsibility of the state over its citizens and foreign nationals has been continually brought to the forefront. Part of the reason for this, is because the treatment of the minority population in a country was often ignored by the government. At which point, a variety of atrocities occurred, sparking enough outrage that various treaties and international accords were enacted to hold nation states accountable. A good example of this can be seen with the development of the International Red Cross in 1863. As five different individuals would form the organization to: address the public health and humanitarian issues that were often ignored by most governments. (Porter 1994, pp 1 -- 18) Over the course of time, this focus continued to grow and evolve to the point, that many government officials became concerned about the effects of the nation state on the lives of the individual. After World Wars I and II, it became obvious that nation states would engage in activities that were in the benefit of their own self-interest (regardless of the impact upon the civilian population). At which point, a series of different international organizations would be created to address these issues. This established, standards that would hold the nation state responsible for the way they treated the civilian population (in particular minorities and foreign nationals). As a result, the law of state responsibility would emerge as major tool that international organizations could use, to hold the different leaders of nation states accountable for such actions. Simply put, this is when the international community is creating various standards through agreements and treaties. As these obligations will hold the government and bureaucrats responsible for the actions as well as policies they implement against a group of people. (Porter 1994, pp 1 -- 18) This is significant, because the establishment of these standards has created a new level of accountability. Where, various governments realized that they must take into account the views of the different population groups within their borders. However, when these laws are violated some kind of countermeasures must be enacted to prevent these abuses from occurring. To determine who is required to enforce the different countermeasures requires: examining the rules surrounding laws of the state (through various treaties / agreements), what kind actions can be taken for any violations and who is responsible for enforcing them. Together, these different elements will provide the greatest insights as to who is responsible for adopting these countermeasures and how recent events are causing them to evolve.

The Laws of the State

After World War I, the laws of the state would slowly begin to emerge, as the different nations states felt that some kind of standards must be in place, to prevent the abuses that lead to the conflict. What happened was the industrial revolution and new technological innovations would mean that governments were exploiting minorities and other ethnic groups (in more perverse ways). As vast inequalities, would appear in societies and among the different nations around the world. This created the social conditions for the war to take place and it allowed for abuses to occur. At which point, a foundation was established for applying the laws of the state and different governments. After the end of World War II, these regulations would be expanded upon, to address the actions of the nation state towards the civilian population. The most notable include: the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (in 1923), the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (in 1948), the Vienna Declaration & Program Actions (in 1993), the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (in 2007) and the UN Declaration on Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity (in 2008).

The Declaration of the Rights of the Child would be the first kind of standards that were in place. It was designed to protect children against: exploitation, hunger, disease and a lack of support. As the law would require nation state to focus on helping to safeguard children and ensure that they have the ability to support themselves in the future. This is important, because this law would serve as the basic foundation for future regulations that were in place (regarding how children should be treated). (Convention of the Rights of the Child 2010)

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights was established in the aftermath of World War II. As nearly 375 nations were addressing the obvious abuses that occurred against the civilian population. At the heart of the agreement, are thirty different articles that define the role of the government in relation to the civilian population. Where, they are expected to follow a number of different standards ranging from: the right to life, liberty and security to the right to own property / work. This is significant, because the creation of these standards would clearly define the most appropriate way that nation states, should be interacting with their citizens and foreign nationals. (UN Declaration of Human Rights 2010)

The Vienna Declaration & Program Actions focused on improving the protection of human rights. As the end of the Cold War, would introduce a new focus on the international community, by preventing the obvious abuses that were occurring (despite various laws and standards that were in place). Under this agreement, human rights would be subdivided into different areas to include: political, social, economic, civil and cultural rights. This is important, because this law would focus on different aspects of how various minorities and other ethnic groups are discriminated against (by their respective nation states). As this agreement sought to address every form of injustices that could be occurring, by defining the numerous ways that this takes place. (Vienna Declaration and the Program of Action 2010)

The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People is not enforceable under international law. Instead, it is a suggestion as to how nation states should seek to address the issues of marginalization and discrimination of the native population. As these groups are often subject to most extreme amounts of negative reactions from the government. This is important, because it shows how the international community, is pushing nation states, to embrace the increased standards for the laws of responsibility. (Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People 2007)

The UN Declaration on Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity is an open proposition that has not been fully ratified by the UN. This is focused on addressing various issues that could affect how women are treated by numerous governments and in society. Where, it is seeking to prevent various abuses from occurring against girls as well as women to include: discrimination, violence, harassment, stigmatization and exclusion. This is important, because it shows how the laws of state responsibility are continuing to increase. Even though this proposal has not been ratified, it is a symbol of the continuous focus on increasing the overall amounts of accountability (in the international community) over various nation states. (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 2008)

When you step back and analyze the different laws of the state, it is clear that they are continuing to evolve. Part of the reason for this, is because the current standards could be ignoring certain aspects of human rights. At which point, various proposals will be introduced that are non-binding, but highlight the obvious abuses that are occurring. Over the course of time, these different standards will become more universally accepted. At which point, they will become a part of law of state responsibility. As the acceptance of them, by the majority of the international community, will mean that they are enforceable under international law. A good example of this can be seen with the Rome Statue of 1998. As this would establish the International Criminal Court (ICC) and it would make genocide as well as crimes against humanity punishable for all nations (under international law). (Boot 2002, pp 1- 19) This is significant, because the standards that were implemented after World War II have evolved to the point that they apply to all governments. As the changing focus, is holding bureaucrats and nation states accountable for how they are treating the civilian population.

What Actions can be taken for Violations / who is Responsible for enforcing them?

When there are any significant violations of the state of responsibility, the matter will be reported to UN Security Council from a UN watchdog organization (such as: the UN Human Rights Commission). The idea is that the Security Council is responsible for promoting peace and stability. As a result, any kind of violations that are reported will see various resolutions passed, calling for a particular nation state to follow different international standards and agreements. Yet, when a nation state continues to refuse to follow these different standards, the Security Council will take action condemning as well as authorizing the use of various corrective countermeasures. To include: coordination / diplomacy, through utilizing established international institutions and the use of force. (Malone 2004)

Coordination / diplomacy are the most common approach used when a nation state is in violation of international law. What happens is the UN Security Council members will work with the country to address the issue. Where, they will examine a host of different possibilities that could encourage the government, to abandon the policies that are in violation of international standards. The objective is to use various forms of negotiation and coordination among the world community, to entice a particular country to embrace international standards. A good example of this can be seen with the six party talks that would take place between North Korea and the different partners in the region to include: the U.S., China, Russia, Japan, South Korea along with EU. This is important, because it highlights how the Security Council is trying to address the impasse of North Korea violating UN resolutions. Where, they are attempting to discuss the issues, before taking more drastic steps to entice compliance. In this aspect, this would relate to the law of state responsibility, by highlighting the first countermeasure that would be used, to push the country to accept responsibility for its actions. (Stockholm International Peace Research 2010, pp. 390 -- 393)

Established international institutions are when the UN (through the international community) has created a number of different organizations to: enforce various resolutions and standards. This approach is taken after various negotiations have failed. However, it can also work before or after the use of force has been authorized. A good example of this can be seen with the extradition of Charles Taylor (the President of Liberia) to the ICC on war crimes and genocide charges. What happened was he had knowingly authorized the violation of various attacks against civilians during the civil war in Sierra Leon. After the conflict was over and the UN had sent peacekeepers into the region, there would be a concentrated effort in going after Taylor. As he was believed to be the perpetrator of the conflict in Sierra Leon and would continually violate international standards of the laws of state responsibility. At which point, he would eventually be arrested and sent to the Hague (the location of the ICC) for trial. This is significant, because it shows another way that different countermeasures are enforced (through established institutions). As they have authority over the nation state and the actions of their leaders. (Duthel 2008, p 31)

The use of force is when a nation state has refused to follow the different resolutions (calling for them to halt various activities). After a nation continues to ignore these different standards, is the point that this will become necessary. As the Security Council, must prevent such abuses of international law from taking place. A good example of this occurred in 1990, after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. What happened was an oil dispute between the two nations would lead to an impasse. As neither country believed that they were violating the other's sovereignty, by claiming that they have rights to the reserves underneath the border. This was problematic, because the extraction of crude oil would highlight a dispute between the two countries, about who should have access to these reserves. After there was a breakdown in negotiations, Iraq would invade Kuwait and would annex the country (as its 19th province). After repeatedly ignoring calls to leave Kuwait, the UN Security Council would authorize the use of force to expel Iraq from Kuwait. Where, it would set a deadline for the nation to comply with various UN resolutions and international standards. At which point, the UN forces would remove Iraq from Kuwait and restore the government to power. This is significant, because it shows how the Security Council can authorize the use of force, during those instances when a nation state is knowingly violating international law. (Anderson 2004, pp. 77 -- 91)