In a rare and unprecedented move, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres invoked Article 99 of the UN Charter on Wednesday (Dec 6). This decision is aimed at formally warning the UN Security Council about the global threat emanating from Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza.
Guterres has been urging an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire” since October 18, but the Security Council has yet to adopt a resolution due to differences among its permanent members.
Understanding Article 99: A unique power for the Secretary-General
Article 99 is a distinctive provision within the UN Charter, granting the secretary-general a special and independent political tool.
The purpose is to issue warnings about new threats to international peace and security, focusing on matters not yet on the council’s agenda.
By invoking Article 99, Guterres gains the right to speak at the Security Council without the need for an invitation from a member state.
In a letter addressed to the Security Council on Wednesday (Dec 6), Guterres expressed his deep concern over the council’s continuous lack of action and the severe deterioration of the situation in Gaza.
He argued that the escalating crisis compelled him to invoke Article 99, marking the first time since he assumed the role of secretary-general in 2017.
The letter shed light the dire conditions in Gaza, with over 16,000 Palestinians dead and thousands more missing.
Guterres warned of a potential breakdown in public order, a collapsing humanitarian system, and the absence of effective protection for civilians.
Also watch | Israel PM Netanyahu claims Israel military encircling house of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar
Can Article 99 bring an end to the war?
Article 99 grants the secretary-general the authority to bring attention to threats, but it does not confer the power to force the Security Council to adopt specific resolutions.
The Security Council, as the UN’s most powerful body, has the responsibility to maintain international peace and security.
If the council chooses to act on Guterres’s advice and adopts a ceasefire resolution, it gains additional powers to ensure implementation.
These powers include the authority to impose sanctions or authorize the deployment of an international force.
However, Article 99 does not provide Guterres with the means to compel the Security Council to adopt resolutions. The veto power held by the five permanent members—China, Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France—poses a significant challenge.
The ability to adopt a substantive resolution relies on unanimous approval or the abstention of the permanent members. The United States, Israel’s chief backer, has previously vetoed a resolution, while Russia, which has been more critical of Israel, has blocked another.
Historical instances of Article 99
Article 99 has been invoked on only four occasions in the past:
- Congo (1960): Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold invoked Article 99, leading to the Security Council adopting Resolution 143, calling for Belgium to withdraw its troops. The Congolese war continued, with deepening crises in subsequent years.
- East Pakistan (1971): Secretary-General U Thant cited Article 99 to seek the Security Council’s intervention during the conflict in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The outcome and the extent of the invocation’s use remain unclear.
- Iran (1979): Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim used Article 99 during the Iran hostage crisis, but the hostages were held for 444 days until released after the Algiers Accords were signed in 1981.
- Lebanon (1989): Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar invoked Article 99 to call for a ceasefire in Lebanon’s escalating civil war. However, the conflict continued despite the Security Council’s call for a ceasefire.
The historical use of Article 99 has yielded mixed results, with limited success in achieving lasting peace. The tool, designed as a preventative measure, aims to deter conflicts from escalating.
However, in the current context of the Gaza conflict, Article 99 has been invoked after the situation has already escalated.
What has Israel’s response been?
The effectiveness of Article 99 in influencing Security Council actions remains uncertain. The secretary-general’s intervention, while facilitating discussions and encouraging compromise, does not fundamentally alter the political calculations of the Security Council’s powerful members.
The veto power wielded by the permanent members, especially the United States, plays a pivotal role in shaping resolutions related to the Israel-Gaza conflict.
Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, has criticised Guterres, accusing him of bias against Israel.
Erdan contends that Guterres’s call for a ceasefire is, in reality, a call to maintain what he sees as “Hamas’s reign of terror in Gaza.”
As the conflict persists and diplomatic efforts unfold, the impact of Article 99 on the Security Council’s actions will be closely monitored.
The tool’s historical use suggests that while it can prompt discussions and resolutions, achieving lasting peace requires navigating the intricate dynamics of international relations and the complex geopolitics surrounding the Israel-Gaza war.
(With inputs from agencies)
Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing developments on the Israel-Palestine conflict after the Hamas attacks. However, we cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, photos and videos.
