The United Nations Organization as a Subject of International Law. The Security Council is empowered to deal with any international dispute or conflict situation that could lead to hostilities. The UN Security Council is doing everything in its power to ensure peaceful

English-language media discuss events at the UN General Assembly. Most of them consider the speech of US President Donald Trump to be the main event. True, different meanings are attributed to this speech. The British media were most impressed by the episode when Trump spoke about the achievements of his government, and this caused laughter in the audience. The same episode is enthusiastically discussed by Trump's consistent American detractors - the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Other commentators take the opportunity to discuss the position of the UN and the principles of Trump's anti-globalism. Trump's speeches foreign policy, writes Bloomberg, are often ridiculed on the basis of inconsistency. He scolds his predecessors for getting involved in unnecessary wars, while he himself has not yet withdrawn troops from Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. He behaved defiantly towards the DPRK, and then met with its leader. He expresses his affection for Russian authorities, while the United States, meanwhile, is selling weapons to Russia's opponents and does not remove sanctions from its leadership.

Some points of criticism of such speeches are not unfounded, the author notes, but this criticism misses the main point. For all the seeming contradictions in Trump's statements, a consistent concept emerges that can be considered, if not a doctrine, then at least a key principle of his state system. The author defines this principle as the preservation of American sovereignty.

This theme was also heard during Trump's speech at the UN: he declared that the United States would never give up its sovereignty to "an unelected and accountable global bureaucracy." But at the same time, he stressed that within the framework of this approach, the United States reserves the right for each state to maintain and observe its customs and is not going to dictate its own rules.

The author believes that such a position is fundamentally different from what previous US presidents did. They all, in one way or another, sought to use the UN and other international institutions as tools to impose their order in other countries. Trump, on the contrary, presents these institutions as forces that limit the possibilities of the United States. This position underlies his opposition to the "ideology of globalism".

Critics believe that by doing so, Trump undermines the authority of the UN, while he could use it to support world system in balance. However, practice shows that this does not work. The UN consistently fails to prevent international conflicts. UN peacekeeping missions are systematically crowned with scandals. Therefore, the author concludes, when Trump refuses to obey the requirements of the UN, this is quite natural.

Even before Trump's speech, a Bloomberg editorial also featured speculation that "the United States and the world need a UN that works." According to the editors, the UN is, by design, a very important organization that is necessary to resolve the current international situation, where nationalist sentiments are growing and geopolitical competition is intensifying. However, the UN does not cope with the role of an international mediator, so the US now tends to distance itself from participating in its activities. This is bad, the editors believe, because in fact the United States should not distance itself, but, on the contrary, take up the reorganization of this institution.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

The situation is complicated by the presence of the most conflicting opinions on this problem: “Many experts are convinced that early and decisive military intervention can be an effective deterrent to further killings. Others believe that the maximum that humanitarian intervention can do is to stop the bloodshed, which may be enough to start peace negotiations and to provide various forms help. That is, it allows you to buy time, but does not solve the problems underlying the conflict.”

It can be stated that in the doctrine international law there is no consensus on the legality of the use of force.

The existing UN peacekeeping doctrine proceeds from the recognition of the existence of the factor military force, and to settle various types and stages of conflict developed various classifications types peacekeeping implemented by the United Nations. The first typology has five components: preventive diplomacy, peacemaking, promoting peace, peacekeeping and peace enforcement. It should be noted that none of these terms is found in the UN Charter, and the classification itself is the product of many years of experience, "trial and error" peacekeeping activities.

The term "preventive diplomacy" was first used by D. Hammarskjöld in the report of the Secretary General on the work of the organization in 1960, where preventive diplomacy was called "the efforts of the United Nations to localize disputes and wars that could aggravate the confrontation between the two opposing sides."

B. Boutros-Ghali gives a slightly different definition of this activity: “... these are actions aimed at easing tension before this tension escalates into a conflict, or, if a conflict has begun, taking immediate measures to contain it and eliminate the causes underlying it. basis". “The concept of D. Hammarskjöld aimed to strengthen the role of the Secretary General and the UN Security Council in the period “ cold war” and expand the range of methods they use. According to D. Hammarskjold, the basis for starting preventive actions was that the situation contained the danger of developing into a more extensive crisis or war between East and West. In the early 1990s, the situation in world politics was different, and above all, the end of the Cold War. Therefore, B. Boutros-Ghali's approach is based on the idea of responding to violent conflicts as they arise and spread. Time dictated the need to develop a concept of preventive diplomacy that would meet the situation that developed in the second half of the 1990s. Very often, the terms "preventive diplomacy" and "crisis prevention" have interchanged."

Thus, the main factor in the implementation of preventive diplomacy is the establishment of trust, which directly depends on the authority of diplomats and the organization itself. In addition, the concept of preventive diplomacy is complemented by the concept of preventive deployment, according to which it is permissible to use armed forces to create demilitarized zones. Many authors, however, do not share this concept, and believe that any use of military force under the auspices of the UN refers directly to peacekeeping or peace enforcement operations.

“The establishment of peace involves the implementation of actions that contribute to the restoration of national institutions and infrastructure destroyed during civil war, or the creation of mutually beneficial ties between countries that participated in the war in order to avoid the resumption of conflict.

In the modern doctrine of UN peacekeeping, this term is almost never used, since it has actually been replaced by the term “peacebuilding”, which implies assistance to countries that have survived a conflict in restoring infrastructure and national institutions, assistance in holding elections, i.e. actions aimed at preventing the recurrence of the conflict. A feature of this type of activity is that it is used only in the post-conflict period.

"Promoting peace is the process of resolving differences and resolving issues that lead to conflict, primarily through diplomacy, mediation, negotiation, or other forms of peaceful resolution." This term, as well as "establishment of peace", is not used in the current period in the legal literature, instead of it the term "means of peaceful settlement of disputes" is usually used. In general, today they often use the division of the peacekeeping concept not into five parts, but into two, more extensive ones - firstly, peacekeeping without the use of military force, which in the classical doctrine includes preventive diplomacy, peacebuilding and means of peaceful settlement of disputes, and secondly , peacekeeping associated with the use of military force, which includes the maintenance and enforcement of peace. Peacekeeping refers to "the measures and activities, using armed forces or military observers, taken by the United Nations Security Council to maintain or restore international peace and security."

There is currently no precise legal definition of peace enforcement operations recorded in the documents.

In addition, often in the legal literature, peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations are combined under the general term "peacekeeping operations", which is not equivalent to the concept of "UN peacekeeping", which refers to the totality of all means used by the UN to maintain international peace and security. In the very general view the purpose of any peacekeeping means is to incline the opposing sides to an agreement and help them resolve contradictions. Typically, to achieve these goals, the following are used practical tasks: "... coercion of one or more opposing sides to the cessation of violent actions, the conclusion of a peace agreement between themselves or with the current government; protection of the territory and (or) population from aggression; isolating a territory or a group of people and limiting their contact with outside world; observation (tracking, monitoring) of the development of the situation, collection, processing and communication of information; providing or assisting in meeting the basic needs of the parties involved in the conflict.”

An important aspect is the right of states to self-defence. According to Art. Article 51 of the Charter: “The present Charter shall in no way affect the inalienable right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the Organization until such time as the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members of the Organization in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall in no way affect the powers and responsibilities of the Security Council under this Statute with respect to the enterprise at any time such action as it deems necessary to maintenance of international peace and security”.

Until recently, there were two points of view on the content of the right to self-defence: a literal interpretation of Art. 51 of the UN Charter, according to which any self-defense is excluded, if it is not carried out in response to an armed attack, and a broad interpretation that allows self-defense in the face of the threat of an armed attack looming over the state.

In the West, for a long time, a doctrine has been formed about the admissibility of interference in the internal affairs of other states for so-called "humanitarian" reasons, and practice shows that the use of force unilaterally, bypassing the Security Council, is becoming a trend.

In the practice of the Red Cross, such actions are defined as "intervention motivated by humanitarian considerations to prevent and alleviate human suffering." This concept gives rise to a number of legal conflicts. On the one hand, any UN peacekeeping actions are inherently humanitarian in nature and are based on the principle of observance and respect for human rights, however, on the other hand, if such actions are carried out without UN sanction, the organization condemns them, even if these actions had positive consequences. For example, in 1978 the United Nations condemned the entry of Vietnamese troops into Cambodia, although this operation ultimately had a humanitarian effect, as it put an end to Pol Pot's genocidal policy.

Conflicts of the latest generation are increasingly of an intrastate nature, which limits the possibility of UN intervention by virtue of state sovereignty. However, it is obvious that for many sovereignty is not an absolute concept: “In essence, internal order has never been autonomous in the strict sense. Sovereignty endows the nation with only the main competence; it is not and never has been an exclusive competence.” Chapter VII of the Charter allows for intervention in the event of "a threat to the peace, a breach of the peace, or an act of aggression." Thus, advocates of intervention believe that the concept of "humanitarian catastrophe" can be equated with "a threat to the peace, a breach of the peace, or an act of aggression." In addition, supporters of this concept also refer to the Preamble and Art. Art. 1, 55 and 56 of the UN Charter, which stipulate the possibility of "taking joint and separate action" for "universal respect and observance of human rights." In fact, such a theory has a right to exist, since the term "peacekeeping operations", as well as the term "intervention for humanitarian reasons", is absent in the Charter, which, however, does not prevent the successful use of PKOs on the basis of an expansionary interpretation of the provisions of the UN Charter.

Western researchers note that “most peacekeeping and humanitarian operations are carried out more for reasons of national state interests, and not according to international standards". Nevertheless, the regularity of such interference does not yet allow it to be recognized as lawful from the point of view of international law: "... the right-duty doctrine of humanitarian intervention is still quite debatable, and the grounds for such interference have not yet been determined."

Obviously, sovereignty cannot be maintained unchanged for centuries. The fact that today an increasing number of issues are being transferred to the global level is a natural phenomenon, and the security sphere could not be an exception. "Principle sovereign equality gives states the opportunity to negotiate, because this can only be done on an equal footing. To call into question this principle means to call into question international law itself - the result of agreements between states.

Some researchers believe that “a number of initial provisions of the UN Charter no longer meet the new conditions. The UN Charter regulates mainly interstate relations, including conflicts between countries ... The UN Charter can help little when we are talking about conflicts within the state, interethnic, interethnic clashes.

Paragraph 4 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter enshrines the universally recognized principle of the non-use of force or the threat of force. However, not everyone agrees with his generally accepted interpretation: “My main postulate, with which I have already spoken in the press: such a principle (non-use of force, prohibition of the use of force) has never existed, does not exist, and most importantly, cannot be in the nature of human society . On the contrary: force, and only force, structures human society - another thing is that it should be applied adequately and proportionately.

Thus, it can be stated that the problem of the use of force in modern international law has not been finally resolved, and despite the formal recognition of the UN as the only international structure which has the right to the legitimate use of force, forceful methods are often used by various states to resolve conflicts and pursue their own national interests.

Thus, analyzing everything stated in the second chapter of this study, we can draw a number of conclusions.

First, exclusively important role The Security Council plays a role in the activities of the Organization. It is the main body for maintaining international peace and sustainable law and order. Decisions of the UN Security Council are legally binding for all participating countries.

Secondly, the Security Council is empowered to consider any international dispute or conflict situation that could lead to hostilities. The UN Security Council is doing everything in its power to peacefully resolve the conflict situation. However, if necessary, the Security Council may take military action against the aggressor.

Thirdly, the UN has undoubtedly made an outstanding contribution to the prevention of a new world war on the planet with the use of deadly chemical, bacteriological and nuclear weapons. Questions of disarmament, the strengthening of peace and security have always occupied and continue to occupy the most important place in the activities of the UN.

Fourthly, thanks to the efforts of the UN over the past 60 years, more international legal documents aimed at maintaining law and order have been adopted in the world than in the entire previous history of mankind.

Conclusion

2012 marks the 67th anniversary of the founding of the largest international organization - the UN. The organization was created in 1945 as a result of the defeat of the aggressive fascist coalition in World War II. The UN Charter was signed on June 26, 1945 by representatives of 51 states in San Francisco and entered into force on October 24, 1945. Since then, this date has been celebrated annually as UN Day.

The United Nations was established on the basis of a voluntary association of sovereign states with the aim of maintaining international peace and security, as well as developing multilateral cooperation between states. The most significant contribution to the creation of the UN was made by representatives of the three allied states - the USSR, the USA and England, supported by other countries of the anti-fascist bloc.

The creation of the UN was a historic milestone in the struggle of peace-loving forces against extremism, militarism and aggression. The United Nations, being a universal international institution, has begun to play an important role in socio-economic, political, legal, military, ethnic, religious and other processes in all regions and areas of the globe.

Perhaps no other international organization or structure has made such a significant contribution to the development of friendly relations between nations, raising living standards, protecting human rights, promoting social progress and conservation environment.

According to the UN Charter, its main organs are: the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, international Court and Secretariat.

The organization also has a network of programs, funds, functional committees and commissions. The UN specialized agencies are: International Labor Organization (ILO), World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), International monetary fund(IMF), Universal Postal Union (UPU), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), United Nations Organization for industrial development(UNIDO), etc.

The General Assembly usually meets once a year, although extraordinary sessions may be called, for example, in cases of a breach of the peace or an act of aggression, as well as special sessions to discuss the most important international problems. All members of the organization participate in the work of the General Assembly. Its competence includes the discussion of any issues relating to all countries, nations or ethnic groups. Each country - a member of the UN, regardless of its territorial size and population, as well as its economic, scientific and technical potential, has one vote in voting procedures. Formal equality ensures respect for the rights of any state that is a member of the United Nations.

The Security Council plays an exceptionally important role in the activities of the Organization. It is the main body for maintaining international peace and sustainable law and order. Decisions of the UN Security Council are legally binding for all participating countries.

The Security Council is empowered to deal with any international dispute or conflict situation that could lead to hostilities. The UN Security Council is doing everything in its power to peacefully resolve the conflict situation. However, if necessary, the Security Council may take military action against the aggressor.

At the direction of the Security Council, if necessary, in conflict situations, the UN Armed Forces, consisting of the military units of the participating countries, can be used. The Department of Peacekeeping Operations operates within the UN Secretariat, which directs the activities of military and civilian personnel involved in the implementation of such operations.

Currently UN armed contingents ("blue helmets") total strength over 75 thousand people carry out 18 peacekeeping operations in various countries of the world on four continents.

The UN has undoubtedly made an outstanding contribution to preventing a new world war on the planet with the use of deadly chemical, bacteriological and nuclear weapons. Questions of disarmament, the strengthening of peace and security have always occupied and continue to occupy the most important place in the activities of the UN.

The UN provides systematic assistance to less developed countries and regions of the world. Through specialized programs implemented in more than 130 countries of the world, the UN annually provides $5 billion in aid in the form of grants and more than $20 billion in loans. The UN provides assistance and support to many hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged people: the poor, refugees, people who have lost their homes.

The UN is developing national strategies to reduce and eliminate poverty in 60 countries. The UN is conducting a targeted fight against drug trafficking. The UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs is the main intergovernmental body for the development of measures in the field of control over drug trafficking and drug trafficking. The United Nations International Program for the Control of drugs provides general guidance on international drug control efforts.

Thanks to the efforts of the UN over the past 60 years, more international legal documents aimed at maintaining law and order have been adopted in the world than in the entire previous history of mankind.

In 1948, it was the UN that adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - a truly historical document that proclaimed the equality of men and women, people with different color skin and various religions, the rights and freedoms of the individual. Since then, in addition to this universal declaration, more than 80 UN treaties and conventions have been adopted aimed at protecting specific human rights.

The United Nations has assisted the development of democratic processes in more than 70 countries by providing concrete assistance in organizing and holding elections there.

The UN played a prominent role in the movement to grant independence to the colonial peoples. As a result of decolonization, more than 80 states gained their independence.

The UN provides systematic assistance to the poorest countries in the world. The United Nations World Food Program is the largest program providing free help providing over one third of the world's food aid.

As a result of activity World Organization health care and the UN Children's Fund carried out large-scale vaccination of children against diseases that represent mortal danger. As a result, the lives of over 2 million children were saved.

It should be noted that, along with major and unconditional achievements, significant omissions and flaws were observed in the UN peacekeeping practice. The UN was unable to contribute to the settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the peacekeeping operations in Somalia and Rwanda ended in failure, the failure of the United Nations peacekeeping mission in Yugoslavia, where the UN was unable to prevent the bombing of this country, was revealed air force NATO. Belatedly, the UN got involved in the process of peaceful settlement of the conflict situation in Iraq. Some peacekeeping operations were accompanied by the outrages of UN peacekeepers (for example, in Africa).

Issues of ensuring peace and maintaining international law and order in modern conditions globalization are of particular importance and require priority attention.

IN last years The UN has been subjected to serious criticism both from the right and from the left. The leadership of this organization was accused of inefficient spending of financial resources, slowness, slow response to acute conflict situations, bureaucratization, etc. To be fair, it should be recognized that a significant proportion criticisms was justified. For recent decades the world has undergone dramatic changes of a political, military, economic and cultural nature. Meanwhile, most UN structures remained unchanged. As a result, there was a discrepancy between the obsolete organizational system and new challenges and demands driven by the rapidly changing events of life.

UN Secretary General K. Annan was forced to admit: “We are in a crisis international system. The UN urgently needs radical reform.” K. Annan in March 2005 made a report "Toward greater freedom: on the way to development, security and observance of human rights." In it, he formulated the introduction of fundamental changes in the structure of some UN bodies. In particular, the number of member states of the Security Council is expected to be expanded from 15 to 24, while maintaining the right of veto for the five largest states: the US, China, Russia, Great Britain, and France. Six new states will receive the status of permanent members (it is assumed that among them will be Germany, Japan, India, Brazil). Three new members of the Security Council will become non-permanent, elected for 2 years. In addition, instead of the Commission on Human Rights, it is planned to create a UN Human Rights Council with broad rights and powers.

Other changes are envisaged, which will not be easy to implement, since the Annan Plan has both supporters and opponents. Nevertheless, the very existence of a reorganization plan testifies to the viability and internal reserves of the UN.

The UN really needs reform - a thoughtful, large-scale, serious reorganization. At the same time, the United Nations maintains a huge intellectual potential, experience in holding large-scale events, its universal character, its commitment to the lofty ideals of humanism, goodness and justice.

Despite certain negative aspects, omissions, inconsistencies, individual erroneous decisions, the United Nations remains the only truly universal international organization on a global scale. The UN maintains close ties with over 1,600 non-governmental organizations. The UN remains a universal forum, a unique international platform for discussing the most significant and important problems of our time, for developing appropriate decisions and taking concrete measures to implement certain programs. No other organization on the planet provides such extensive assistance to the population affected by floods, earthquakes, crop failures and droughts. No other organization provides such support to refugees fleeing military conflicts and persecution as the UN. No public or state structure does not pay as much attention to the problems of eradicating hunger and poverty on earth as the United Nations.

Being a multi-level, multinational, open, universal system, the UN is a prototype of a mechanism for uniting all countries, all organizations and public structures in the course of implementing the principle in the twenty-first century: unity in diversity. The UN provides an opportunity to discuss any controversial and difficult questions facilitating dialogue between representatives different languages and adverbs different religions, cultures, dissimilar political views.

The preservation and strengthening of the UN is the most important task of all peace-loving forces, all peacekeeping organizations and people of good will on the planet.

Bibliographic list

1. Abugu, A.I. Preventive diplomacy and its implementation in modern international law: Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of legal sciences [Text] / A.I. Abugu. - M., 2000. - 18 p.

2. Adamishin, A. On the way to world government [Text] / A. Adamishin // Russia in global politics. - 2009. - No. 1. - November December. - S. 87.

3. Berezhnov, A.G. Personal rights: some questions of theory [Text] / A.G. Berezhnov. - M., 2011. - 211 p.

4. Bovett, D. Armed Forces of the United Nations. Per. from English. [Text] / D. Bovett. - M.: Politizdat, 1992. - 312 p.

5. Bogdanov, O.V. General and complete disarmament [Text] / O.V. Bogdanov. - M., 2008. - 514 p.

6. Boutros Boutros-Ghali - Sixth General Secretary UN: Collection of materials [Text]. - M.: Publishing house of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, 2005. - 211 p.

7. Gavrilov, V.V. UN and human rights: mechanisms for the creation and implementation of regulations [Text] / V.V. Gavrilov. - Vladivostok, 2008. - 543 p.

8. Gavrilov, V.V. Cooperation of states in the field of human rights and the United Nations [Text] / V.V. Gavrilov. - M., 2010. - 543 p.

9. Ganyushkina E.B. Formation of an international economic order[Text] / E.B. Ganyushkina // International Law and International Organizations. - 2012. - No. 1. - S. 10-33.

10. Getman-Pavlova, I.V. International law: lecture notes [Text] / I.V. Hetman-Pavlov. - M., 2007. - 400 p.

11. Report of the group on UN peace operations. A/55/305 - S/2000/809 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.un.org/russian/peace/reports/peace_operations.

12. Zimnenko, B.L. international law and legal system Russian Federation. General part: Course of lectures [Text]. - M.: Statute, RAP, 2010. - 416 p.

13. Kartashkin, V.A. The United Nations in the modern globalizing world [Text] / V.A. Kartashkin. - M., 2011. - 541 p.

14. Kibalnik, A.G. Modern international criminal law: concept, tasks and principles [Text] / Under scientific. ed. doc. legal Sciences A.V. Naumov. - St. Petersburg, 2008. - 342 p.

15. Kochubey, M.A. Political and legal risks of the International Criminal Court [Text] / M.A. Kochubey // Russia: from reforms to stability: Scientific works of the Institute of International Law and Economics. A.S. Griboyedov. - M., 2009. - 324 p.

16. Lenshin, S.I. Legal Regime of Armed Conflicts and International Humanitarian Law: Monograph [Text]. - M: For the rights of military personnel, 2009. - 240 p.

17. McFarley, N. Multilateral interventions after the collapse of bipolarity [Text] / N. McFarley // International processes. - 2011. - No. 1. - S. 22-29.

18. Maleev Yu.N. Conceptual substantiation of preventive humanitarian intervention [Text] / Yu.N. Maleev // International Law. - 2009. - No. 2 (38). - S. 6-20.

19. Maleev Yu.N. The United Nations and the use of armed force by states ("high idealism" and reality) [Text] / Yu.N. Maleev // 60 years of the UN. 50 years Russian Association UN assistance. - M.: RUDN, 2006. - S. 65-107.

20. International and domestic protection of human rights: Textbook [Text] / Ed. R.M. Valeeva. - M.: Statute, 2011. - 830 p.

21. International law. Special part: Textbook for universities [Text] / M.V. Andreev, P.N. Biryukov, R.M. Valeev and others; resp. ed. R.M. Valeev, G.I. Kurdyukov. - M.: Statute, 2010. - 624 p.

22. International public law: Textbook [Text] / Ed. D.K. Bekyasheva. - M., 2009. - 553 p.

23. International economic development. Summary of the United Nations [Text]. - M., 2012. - 22 p.

24. Memorandum of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs dated September 11, 1964 “On the issue of financial position UN" [Text] // international life. - 1964. - №11.

25. Modin, N.V. "Humanitarian intervention" as a method of regulation international conflicts[Text] / N.V. Modin // Power. - 2007. - No. 3. - S. 94-97.

26. Morozov, G.I. International organizations: some questions of theory [Text] / G.I. Morozov. - M., 2011. - 415 p.

27. Neshataeva, T.N. International organizations and law. New trends in international legal regulation [Text] / T.N. Neshataeva. - M., 2008. - 386 p.

28. Pechurov, S. Armed forces in peacekeeping operations [Text] / S. Pechurov. - M., 2010. - 311 p.

29. Sazonova, K.L. UN peacekeeping doctrine and the problem of the use of force in international law [Text] // Public and private international law. - 2011. - No. 6. - S. 19-22.

30. Semenov, V.S. To the question of the legal basis of the UN Armed Forces [Text] / V.S. Semenov // Military legal journal. - 2009. - No. 1. - S. 56-62.

31. Sokolova, N.A. Mechanism international management UN system in the field of environmental protection [Text] / N.А. Sokolova // Journal of Russian Law. - 2008. - No. 8. - S. 123-130.

32. Transcripts of speeches and answers to media questions by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation S. Ivanov [Text]. - M.: Publishing house of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, 2004. - 213 p.

33. Falk, R. United Nations. Per. from English. [Text] / R. Falk. - M., 2010. - 609 p.

34. Fedorenko, N. Fundamental principles of the UN [Text] / N. Fedorenko. - M., 2008. - 98 p.

35. Halderman, J. The legal basis of the UN Armed Forces [Text] / J. Halderman // Diplomatic Academy. Collection of materials on the international law of military conflicts. - M., 2012. - S. 189-202.

36. Holiki, A., Rakhimov, N. The history of the appearance and state of the art preventive diplomacy [Text] / A. Holiki, N. Rakhimov. - M., 2009. - 167 p.

37. Shlyantsev, D.A. International Law: A Course of Lectures [Text] / D.A. Shlyantsev. - M.: Yustitsinform, 2011. - 256 p.

Hosted on Allbest.ru