"By All Means Necessary!". The Impact of High Discretion Interventions by UN Member States in Kuwait, Somalia and Mali

This thesis focuses on the ambiguity of conflict resolution carried forward by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in the usage of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Specifically, the study analyzes three case studies: 1990-91 Iraq, 1992-95 Somalia, and 2012-23 Mali, to shed light on the effectiveness of the UN interventions in these territories. These case studies are connected to a series of resolutions issued by the UNSC to solve the crises. The common denominators of these resolutions are the delegation of power from the UNSC to UN Member States and the use of the expression “by all means necessary.” This thesis aims to examine the damage caused in these territories by the limited discretion given to UN Member States, to assess the effectiveness of UN crisis management. The thesis is divided in four chapters: the first one showcases an evolutionary description of the United Nations and Chapter VII of the UN Charter, in comparison with the League of Nations; the second one focuses on the 1990-91 Iraq-Kuwait crisis, concentrating on the US role in the conflict; the third chapter studies the 1992-95 Somali Civil War after the abdication of General Siad Barre, with a focus on the US intervention; the last chapter analyzes the 2012-23 political instability in Mali, observing the role of France in the crisis. I will use a qualitative analytical method to shed light about the specific interventions of the United States in Kuwait and Somalia, and France in Mali, which are all authorized by the UNSC and observe the before and after scenario of these zones after the interventions to explain the UNSC effectiveness and coherency of its core purpose.