Sovereignty of Reason

-Nandini Goel

As the clock struck nine, the shuffling of chairs and fixing of ties marked the
assembly of the United Nations Security Council. Prided with the duty of ensuring
international security, the committee is in an impasse that threatens one of their
cardinal motives. How do you achieve international peace when the individual states
refuse to warrant your help?

The delegates stepped into committee with their definitions of Article 2(7) of the UN
Charter as variable as their respective time zones. The first to question the meaning of
intervention were the delegates of India. If youre in your house, surely your
neighbours and your friends knock before entering, right?

Following them, the delegates of the Islamic Republic of Iran took the podium, and
provided the committee with a reality check by firing some accusations at the
member states present, The UNGA passed a resolution asking the United States to
immediately comply with the ruling of the ICJ. They said, But violations of
international obligation occur because countries like the USA are shameless.

Their approach was direct as they claimed that, Everyones hungry for power in
todays day and age, but very few know how to wield it. In response, the
representatives of the United States of America didn't mince their words when they
opined, The non-intervention act has become outdated.

The committee was thrown into an inflamed discussion prior to this statement, and
the delegate of Iran questioned the United States infinitesimal actions in Rwanda as
compared to the bombing conducted by them in Kosovo. The delegates of Venezuela
backed them up by accusing the United States of intervening only in the countries
rich in their resources of oil.

All the delegates seem to be in determined spirits as they juggle with terms like
sovereignty of state, extent of international intervention, and domestic jurisdiction, all
the while balancing the mantle of world peace on their shoulders.