(a) There may be various reasons for the failure of the Security Council of United Nations in maintaining international peace and order. One of the main reasons is its composition and imbalanced power dynamics. Critically analyse. (20 marks)

(b) Wha

Question

(a) There may be various reasons for the failure of the Security Council of United Nations in maintaining international peace and order. One of the main reasons is its composition and imbalanced power dynamics. Critically analyse. (20 marks)

(b) What is innocent passage on the Law of the Sea? Examine the Indian position on this matter. (15 marks)

(c) Examine the principles of acquisition of territorial sovereignty by newly emerged states. (15 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

These issues show how inherited international structures can lag behind political reality.

(a) UNSC composition and power imbalance 
The Council's failure is not one-dimensional, but composition and voting are central. Article 23, amended in 1965, gives five permanent and ten non-permanent members; the amendment raised non-permanent seats from six to ten but left the P5 unchanged. Article 27 requires nine affirmative votes for substantive decisions, including all P5 concurring votes, so each P5 member has a veto. This 1945 bargain secured great-power participation, yet it has become a structural weakness. In Syria and Ukraine, repeated vetoes blocked resolutions, humanitarian access and accountability, allowing conflict to harden. The veto turns legal decisions into political calculations. G4 reform proposals (India, Japan, Germany, Brazil) and the African Group's demand for more permanent seats expose the same fault line: the Council reflects 1945 power, not present-day demographic, economic or security realities. Africa and Asia remain underrepresented, and regional inequities weaken the legitimacy of Council decisions. Uniting for Peace Resolution 377A (1950) lets the General Assembly recommend collective measures when the Council is paralysed, but it cannot replace binding Chapter VII action. On balance, composition is not the sole cause of failure, but it is a principal one: the veto can protect great-power interests at the cost of collective legitimacy.

(b) Innocent passage and India's position 
Under UNCLOS Part II, Section 3, Article 17 grants all ships innocent passage through the territorial sea. Articles 18-19 make passage continuous, expeditious and not prejudicial to the coastal state's peace, good order or security. Submarines must surface and show their flag. Prejudicial acts include weapons exercises, spying, propaganda, pollution, fishing, boarding or serious crimes. India's position is in the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976. Section 4(2) requires foreign warships to give prior notice to the Central Government before entering or passing through Indian territorial waters; it does not itself require prior authorisation, though a separate notification may regulate or suspend innocent passage for security. India thus accepts the UNCLOS right while preserving sovereign control. The MV Enrica Lexie incident of 2012, though not squarely an innocent-passage case because it arose in the contiguous zone, not the territorial sea, shows India's insistence on jurisdiction over foreign vessels and refusal to accept blanket immunity. In Union of India v. Republic of Italy (2014), the Supreme Court upheld India's jurisdiction to prosecute the marines, reinforcing coastal-state authority.

(c) Acquisition of territorial sovereignty by newly emerged states 
Newly emerged states usually acquire territory through succession, not fresh occupation. Uti possidetis juris, applied in the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) (1986), stabilises colonial boundaries at independence; it prevents border wars but can freeze arbitrary lines. Effective occupation, per Island of Palmas, requires continuous and peaceful display of sovereign authority, but for new states it often evidences inherited title rather than free-standing acquisition. Self-determination can create states, yet it does not automatically confer territorial sovereignty. The Kosovo Advisory Opinion (2010) held that a unilateral declaration of independence did not violate international law, but did not decide statehood or title; recognition is declaratory, not a legal prerequisite. India and Pakistan inherited the Radcliffe Line and treated it as the sovereignty baseline, even where disputes persist. Post-Soviet states largely accepted former Soviet borders, again reflecting uti possidetis. The 2014 Bangladesh-India Bay of Bengal arbitration is not a title case; it shows newly emerged states' inherited baselines and maritime zones must later be delimitated, so land sovereignty precedes maritime entitlement.

The common thread is structural inertia across all three: the veto, coastal-state control and inherited borders are defensible for stability, but must be reformed or interpreted flexibly to avoid inequality.

(a) There may be various reasons for the failure of the Security Council of United Nations in maintaining international peace and…

Model answer

What "Critically analyse" is asking you to do

Structure that answers it

Where marks are lost

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Practice this exact question

More from Law 2025 Paper I