• Home
  • Law


  • Category:
  • Document type:
    Math Problem
  • Level:
  • Page:
  • Words:




  1. How does international law regulate war and how effective is it in doing so?

The primary role of international law is to set rules or laws in relations to the member states and nations. This acts as a codification of the conventions regulating the relations between these nations. These laws, therefore, come in handy in instances where a conflict between nations emerges. It’s clear that the international law is an integral part of the international society especially in building and fostering the relationship with other countries. Tasked with the objective of regulating war the international laws is influential on the world stage and relation between countries through coordinating mediation talks between conflicting countries

The international laws also limit wars this furthers the course of war in particular countries. It also causes fighting countries to be shorthanded regarding resources and funds allocated to further the course of war. This ensures that these countries look for other alternatives to settle out their disputes since going into war prove to be too expensive for each country. However, there has been an on-going debate about whether the international laws have been effective in preventing or regulating war considering the increment in cases of international disputes.

  1. Can humanitarian intervention be legitimate even if it is not legal under international law?

The role of the international humanitarian is to offer assistance for basic needs to victims of war. Guided by the principle of humanity it is tasked with preventing and alleviating human suffering this can be through protection of human life, health and ensuring respect for human being. The International humanitarian is made up of a complex network of government agencies, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations. This has led to it being referred to a “non-system “. Its tasks and role of alleviating human suffering have crossed over to all countries globally. Despite the fact that the humanitarian intervention is not legitimised in the international law I think that it is legitimate. This is because it is only concentrated in offering help to the victims of war and it are not in any way involved in the war. With the war certainly claiming quite a huge death toll and also the destruction of property and resources the humanitarian intervention seem to be the only body concerned with the well-being of individuals affected by the war. This, therefore, is enough reason to back up the thought of legitimising the humanitarian intervention in countries in war.

  1. What role do international organisations play in resolving global conflicts? How effective are they?

International organizations have in most cases acted as the conflict resolution team in global conflict. This, therefore, gives these organizations the mediator’s role in finding a solution to the global conflict. This international organization uses various strategies in their conflict resolution course with the basic ones being opening lines of communication and keeping sight both parties underlying interests. In their mediation role, the international organizations try to resolve the global conflict by creating value out of the conflict. In this case, they explore the differences in opinions, and preferences among the involved parties in the global conflict in an effort to bring out the significant reason behind the conflict. Evidently the international organization has been successful in spearheading global conflict resolution talks. However with the current emergence of global conflict issues, there is doubt about whether the international organization is effective in its task. Some notable significant fall in conflict resolution also puts more doubts on the International Organization role in global conflict resolution.

  1. Are war crimes trials political trials?

For some time now there has been a great debate on the question whether war crimes trials are political trials or those in pursuit of justice. I tend to think that this are trials instigated by the pursuit of justice since like any other trial evidence is presented for all to see before the trial’s ruling. Therefore, one can argue that these trials are not biased judging by the lengthy investigation and legal battle where the suspect has the opportunity to prove that they are not guilty. It is a common trend that the former leaders or influential figures who are often tried are the ones who claim that these trials are politically instigated. Therefore, this is a lame reason to attempt to keep them from serving this trial. However the claims that this are politically induced trials might also be true considering that most of this individuals tried in war crime are fresh from politics therefore it might be a strategy to get back at them due to their type of ruling while they were in power. On the other hand, this analogy just seems farfetched considering the number of individuals facing these trials.

  1. How has the African Union dealt with the issue of intervention under international law? What challenges has it faced

The AU has faced quite some challenges on the issue of intervention under international law. Despite its mandate power on the African member nation, the AU has received a hostile reception when articulation its interventional powers under the International law. This was clearly seen in Sierra Leones civil war. Before the AU final stamping its power and taking over Sierra Leone during its peacekeeping missions in this country, it faced a rather hostile reception where its peacekeepers were always attacked resulting in a death toll and casualties (Hermann, 2016). However after putting various sanctions on Sierra Leone, the AU finally succeeded in restoring peace in the country. Therefore, AU had to impose its leadership by going for the iron fist strategy in order to fight the hostility on the issue of intervention which falls under the international law. This led to it being in constant conflict with some countries which to some extent was a blow to its administration in Africa and effort to reduce war crime cases in Africa.

  1. Why is the international law of the sea so important?

The international law of the sea is a number of customs, treaties, and agreements by most countries globally where they have all agreed to maintain order, ensure productivity and maintain peaceful relations with the sea. With almost all nations joining the treaty the United States is yet to join this treaty with claims that it fears the treaty might infringe on its sovereignty as a country. Water covers up to three-quarter of the total earth surface, and it is also a significant means of international travel. This shows that the international law of the sea is a quite important treaty due to the multiple benefits gained from the water bodies by various nations and the whole world as a whole. With the development of societal norms and reasoning towards the environment, these water bodies have to be protected, and every nation should play its part to ensure this as it has done by the signing of the international law of the sea treaty.

  1. 7.How effective has international human rights and refugee law been in constraining the actions of states? What does this tell us about the relationship between states and international law?

International refugee law has been widely seen as a constitution for national refugee policy. However, this issue has caused widespread debate and often being politicised. Various countries have created their own laws governing the issue of refugees which keenly reveals to be a strategy deterring refugees from the country. These newly implemented laws are seen to have more power over the international human rights laws governing man nations. Therefore, the international human rights and refugee laws are less effective compared to this newly implemented laws thaw deter refugees from entering these countries.

This is a clear indication that the international laws are often overlooked compared to the state laws. This is backed up by evidence of nearly every nation implementing their own laws and in the US the state laws which seem to have an upper hand when compared to the international laws governing all nations globally.

  1. What are the major challenges facing the international law and international organisations today?

The major challenge facing the international law is the capacity of member countries to comply with the laws entirely. This has led to constant conflict between the international governing body and the member countries over their capacity to comply with the set laws or authoritative ideas. This has been a massive blow in the creation of unity within this international body due to the frequent conflicts with the member nations. The other significant challenge to the international organization is its role in stamping its authoritative power. The International organization has occasionally been criticised for its lack of an authoritative role. Therefore, the member countries are quite relaxed to its set laws and authoritative decisions. These challenges have deterred the International Organization from making significant strides since its formation. The international laws, on the other hand, have been criticised for being too ambiguous therefore it is hard for all member countries to follow them to the later.


Herrmann, Rachel B. «Rebellion Or Riot?: Black Loyalist Food Laws In Sierra Leone». Slavery & Abolition (2016): 1-24.