Syria Chemical Weapons (United Nations)

The United Nations is a very important international organization that reaches every corner of the globe. This administration focuses on keeping peace throughout the world, developing friendly relations among nation, helping nations work together in times of need, and being a center for integrating and achieving these goals. Some of the issues that the United Nations targets are issues such as sustainable human rights, environmental protection, and counter terrorism, as well as many others.

In September of this year, the United Nations Security Council agreed on requiring Syria to give up its chemical weapons since the issue had been accountable for numerous deaths and also because it constitutes a threat to peace and security internationally. I think that this decision made by the UN was crucial and will be extremely beneficial down the road. The deal that the United Nations proposed to make with Syria needed approval by 15 members of the UN Security Council, which would amount to significant international diplomatic initiative of the Syrian civil war.

Such intervention would be a remarkable turn for President Obama, who had been pushing for a military strike in Syria a few weeks ago before he accepted a Russian proposal to have Syria give up its chemical arsenal. This resolution was legally binding and demanded that if Syria failed to comply with the terms, the Security Council would take extreme measures such as economic sanctions or even military action. It makes sense for the United Nations to take such measures and make such a huge deal of it because the chemical weaponry is affecting the lives of many innocent people. And, after all, one of the main focuses of the U.

N. is to keep peace throughout the world. This resolution, which legally obligated Syria to give up its stockpile of poison gas, did not threaten the use of force if Syria failed to comply, but the Security council reconvened to address the issue and impose unspecified measures under Chapter VII, a provision of the U. N. Charter that is used to authorize sanctions or the use of force. There are many challenges ahead en route to obtaining this goal, such as devising a plan to get rid of the weapons and trying to reach a broader deal that could end the fighting and put a transitional government in place as well.

Although there will be many roadblocks in the way, it is very important that these regulations get put into place. In October, Syria submitted a formal declaration of its chemical weapons program and its plans for destroying its arsenal three days ahead of the deadline. The initiative to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons program came from the Russians, who were looking for a way to avert American military action against the Assad government.

I believe that this resolution, which was proposed by the Russians, and supported by the Americans, was a very good idea because this form of weaponry caused many horrible injuries and a hefty percentage of war deaths. Many countries, such as South Korea, Libya, Iraq, Japan, and Albania have already destructed most of the chemical weapons that are in their possession. Most importantly, some recent attacks, which have killed hundreds of civilians, are major motives for this chemical weapon intervention.

From the standpoint of a United Nations correspondent, I would think that this would be a pressing issue to solve and devising a plan to execute the solution would be equally as crucial. Hopefully, Syria reaches its deadline for the first half of 2014 for destroying all forms of its chemical arms. In such circumstances, the United Nations will not have to intervene in their matters and many civilians would have their lives saved down the road. No matter what the need, the cost of a war should never be a human being, or multiple human beings, in this aspect.