After much multilateral diplomatic negotiation, the Secretary General of the United
Nations, under the authority granted him by Article 99 of the United Nations Charter, convenes a
meeting of the Security Council to deal with the reconstruction of Iraq. In doing so, he cites
Chapter XI of the Charter, its "Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories," and
specifically, Article 73(b): "Members of the United Nations which have or assume
responsibilities for the adItlinistration of territories [have a responsibility] to develop self-
government, to take due accoUnt of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in
the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular
circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying s~ges of advancement."
Shortly after they convene, the United States and Great Britain submit a proposed
resolution that grants them the sole authority over the political and economic redevelopment of
Iraq, leaving all other areas, like humanitarian aid and refugee resettlement, to the entire Security
Council. After debate a vote is taken and France exercises its veto power. Then France and
Russia submit a proposed resolution that grants authority to the Security Council for all of the
reconstruction or "nation building" of Iraq. After debate a vote is take and both the United States
and Great Britain exercise their veto powers.
With the Council at a deadlock, the Ambassadors of the latter two countries announce at a
press conference that reconstruction will be conducted in accordance with their responsibilities
under Article 73(b) by a "coalition of the willing" that they will jointly lead. They invite all UN
members, non-government organizations, and private bodies like multi-national corporations to
assist them in this vital, compelling undertaking so as to realize the human rights guaranteed the
people of Iraq by customary intemationallaw as well as by the United Nations Charter and the
human rights institutions and instruments that it has produced.
1. Is the proposed action by the United States and Great Britain legal?
2. How will it impact on the Qast and future efficiency of the Security Council as the
Charter's main weapon for the protection ofintemationaI human rights?
3. What do you feel is the best way at this point in time, to guarantee the future
international human rights of the people of Iraq?
4. ~ do you feel that (answer to 3 aoove) to be the best way?
