document_title: Civil Rights Act of 1991

question_text: what year did the civil rights act add jury trials to title vii

text: Civil Rights Act of 1991

text: Predecessors[edit]

text: The 1991 Act combined elements from two different civil right acts of the past: the Civil Rights Act of 1866, better known by the number assigned to it in the codification of federal laws as Section 1981, and the employment-related provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, generally referred to as Title VII. The two statutes, passed nearly a century apart, approached the issue of employment discrimination very differently: Section 1981 prohibited only discrimination based on race or color, but Title VII also prohibited discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, and national origin. Section 1981, which had lain dormant and unenforced for a century after its passage, allowed plaintiffs to seek compensatory damages and trial by jury. Title VII, passed in the 1960s when it was assumed that Southern juries could not render a fair verdict, allowed only trial by the court and provided for only traditional equitable remedies: back pay, reinstatement, and injunctions against future acts of discrimination. By the time the 1991 Act was passed, both allowed for an award of attorneys fees.

text: The 1991 Act expanded the remedies available to victims of discrimination by amending Title VII of the 1964 Act.

text: Background[edit]

text: Congress had amended Title VII once before, in 1972, when it broadened the coverage of the Act. It was moved to overhaul Title VII in 1991 and to harmonize it with Section 1981 jurisprudence, with a series of controversial Supreme Court decisions:

text:
Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1988), which held that an employee could not sue for damages caused by racial harassment on the job because even if the employer's conduct were discriminatory, the employer had not denied the employee the "same right... to make and enforce contracts... as is enjoyed by white citizens," the language that Congress chose in passing the law in 1866.
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989), which made it more difficult for employees of Wards Cove Packing Company to prove that an employer's personnel practices, neutral on their face, had an unlawful disparate impact on them by requiring that they identify the particular policy or requirement that allegedly produced inequalities in the workplace and show that it, in isolation, had that effect.
Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989), which held that the burden of proof shifted, once an employee had proved that an unlawful consideration had played a part in the employer's personnel decision, to the employer to prove that it would have made the same decision if it had not been motivated by that unlawful factor, but such proof by the employer would constitute a complete defense for the employer.
Martin v. Wilks, 490 U.S. 755 (1989), which permitted white firefighters who had not been party to the litigation, establishing a consent decree governing hiring and promotion of black firefighters in the Birmingham, Alabama, Fire Department, to bring suit to challenge the decree.

text: Changes[edit]

text: The Patterson case had attracted much criticism since it appeared to leave employees who had been victimized by racial harassment on the job with no effective remedies, as they could not prove a violation of Section 1981 and could rarely show any wage losses that they could recover under Title VII. In addition, the Court's narrow reading of the phrase "make or enforce contracts" eliminated any liability under Section 1981 for lost promotions and most other personnel decisions that did not constitute a refusal and that was the end to hire or a discharge on the basis of race or color.

text: Congress addressed the issue by redefining the phrase "make and enforce contracts" to include "the making, performance, modification, and termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and conditions of the contractual relationship." Congress also clarified that Section 1981 applied to both governmental and private discrimination, the issue that the Supreme Court originally announced it would decide in Patterson.

text: Congress also believed that the Wards Cove case made it too difficult to prove disparate impact claims under Title VII. The Act was amended to provide that an employee could prove a case by showing either that an individual practice or group of practices resulted in "a disparate impact on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, and the respondent fails to demonstrate that such practice is required by business necessity." Congress added, however, "The mere existence of a statistical imbalance in an employer's workforce on account of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin is not alone sufficient to establish a prima facie case of disparate impact violation."

text: While the majority in Congress supported the burden-shifting rule in Price Waterhouse, it was uncomfortable with an employer's ability to prove that it would have made the same decision in any event, as a complete defense in a case in which it had been shown that race or gender or another unlawful factor played a significant role in its decision. Congress amended the Act to provide that the employer's proof that it would have made the same decision in any case was a defense to back pay, reinstatement and other remedies but not to liability per se. The practical effect of this change was to allow a party that proved that the employer discriminated but could not show that it made any practical difference in the outcome could still recover attorney's fees after showing that the employer discriminated, even if no other remedy was awarded.

text: Finally, Congress limited the rights of non-parties to attack consent decrees by barring any challenges by parties who knew or should have known of the decree or who were adequately represented by the original parties.

text: The Court also authorizes jury trials on Title VII claims and allows Title VII plaintiffs to recover emotional distress and punitive damages, while imposing caps on such relief under Title VII. The 1991 Act also made technical changes affecting the length of time allowed to challenge unlawful seniority provisions, to sue the federal government for discrimination, and to bring age discrimination claims, but it allowed successful plaintiffs to recover expert witness fees as part of an award of attorney's fees and to collect interest on any judgment against the federal government.


document_title: George Marshall

question_text: who played george c marshall in saving private ryan

root

text: George Marshall

text: Early life[edit]

text: George Catlett Marshall Jr. was born into a middle-class family in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, the son of George Catlett Marshall Sr. and Laura Emily (née Bradford) Marshall.[8] Marshall was a scion of an old Virginia family, as well as a distant relative of former Chief Justice John Marshall.[9] Later, when asked about his political allegiances, Marshall often joked that his father had been a Democrat and his mother a Republican, whereas he was an Episcopalian.[10]

tag: p

text: Marshall attended the Virginia Military Institute (VMI),[11] as had his elder brother. He was an All-Southern tackle for the VMI Keydets varsity football team in 1900.[12][13] He was initiated into the Kappa Alpha Order in 1901, the year of his graduation.[14]

text: Early infantry career and the Philippines[edit]

text: Following his graduation from VMI, Marshall sat for a competitive examination for a commission in the U.S. Army.[15]  While awaiting the results, Marshall had accepted the position of Commandant of Students at the Danville Military Institute in Danville, Virginia.[16] Marshall passed the exam and was commissioned a second lieutenant in February, 1902.[17]

text: Prior to World War I, Marshall received various postings in the United States and the Philippines, including serving as an infantry platoon leader and company commander during the Philippine–American War and other guerrilla uprisings.[18] He was schooled in modern warfare, including a tour at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas from 1906 to 1910 as both a student and an instructor.[19] He was the Honor Graduate of his Infantry-Cavalry School Course in 1907, and graduated first in his 1908 Army Staff College class.[20]

text: After another tour of duty in the Philippines, Marshall returned to the United States in 1916 to serve as aide-de-camp to the commander of the Western Department, former Army chief of staff Major General J. Franklin Bell, at the Presidio in San Francisco.[20] After the United States declared war on Germany in April 1917, Marshall relocated with Bell to Governors Island, New York when Bell was reassigned as commander of the Department of the East.[20] Shortly afterwards, Marshall was assigned to help oversee the mobilization of the 1st Division for service in France.[20]

text: World War I[edit]

text: During the Great War, he had roles as a planner of both training and operations. In the summer of 1917, he was assigned as assistant chief of staff for operations on the staff of the 1st Division.[20] After overseeing the division's mobilization and organization in Texas, he departed for France with the division staff in mid-1917.[20]  On the long ocean voyage, his roommate was the division's assistant chief of staff for training, Lesley J. McNair;[21] the two formed a personal and professional bond that they maintained for the rest of their careers.[22]

text: After arriving in France, Marshall served with the 1st Division on the St. Mihiel, Picardy, and Cantigny fronts.[20] He won recognition and acclaim for his planning of the attack for the Battle of Cantigny, which took place from May 28 to 31, 1918;[20] its success resulted in the first notable American victory of the war.[23]  On May 26, Marshall was injured while travelling to several subordinate units to conduct pre-attack coordination.[24]  As he departed the division headquarters area, his horse stumbled, fell, and rolled over;[25] Marshall's left foot was caught in the stirrup, and he sustained a severe sprain and bruise.[25]  A physician bound Marshall's injured ankle and foot with adhesive tape so that he could avoid medical evacuation and remain with the division to oversee the Cantigny attack.[26]

text: In mid-1918, he was posted to the headquarters of the American Expeditionary Force, where he worked closely with his mentor, General John Joseph Pershing, and was a key planner of American operations. He was instrumental in the planning and coordination of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, which contributed to the defeat of the German Army on the Western Front in 1918.[27]  Marshall held the permanent rank of captain and the temporary rank of colonel;[28] he was recommended for promotion to temporary brigadier general in October 1918, but the Armistice occurred before the recommendation was acted on.[29]  After the war, Marshall reverted to his permanent rank.[29]

text: Between World War I and II[edit]

text: In 1919, he became an aide-de-camp to General John J. Pershing. Between 1920 and 1924, while Pershing was Army Chief of Staff, Marshall worked in a number of positions in the army, focusing on training and teaching modern, mechanized warfare. Between World Wars I and II, he was a key planner and writer in the War Department, commanded the 15th Infantry Regiment for three years in China, and taught at the Army War College. In 1927, as a lieutenant colonel, he was appointed assistant commandant of the Infantry School at Fort Benning, where he initiated major changes to modernize command and staff processes, which proved to be of major benefit during World War II. Marshall placed Edwin F. Harding in charge of the Infantry School's publications, and Harding became editor[30]:41 of Infantry in Battle, a book that codified the lessons of World War I. Infantry in Battle is still used as an officer's training manual in the Infantry Officer's Course and was the training manual for most of the infantry officers and leaders of World War II.

text: From June 1932 to June 1933 he was the commanding officer of the 8th Infantry Regiment at Fort Screven, Georgia. From July 1933 to October 1933 he was commander of Fort Moultrie, South Carolina and District I of the Civilian Conservation Corps, and he was promoted to colonel in September 1933.  He was senior instructor and chief of staff for the Illinois National Guard's 33rd Division from November 1933 to August 1936.

text: Marshall commanded the 5th Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division and Vancouver Barracks in Vancouver, Washington from 1936 to 1938, and was promoted to brigadier general in October 1936. In addition to obtaining a long-sought and significant troop command, traditionally viewed as an indispensable step to the pinnacle of the US Army, Marshall was also responsible for 35 Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) camps in Oregon and southern Washington. As post commander Marshall made a concerted effort to cultivate relations with the city of Portland and to enhance the image of the US Army in the region. With the CCC, he initiated a series of measures to improve the morale of the participants and to make the experience beneficial in their later life. He started a newspaper for the CCC region that proved a vehicle to promote CCC successes, and he initiated a variety of programs that developed their skills and improved their health. Marshall's inspections of the CCC camps gave him and his wife Katherine the chance to enjoy the beauty of the American northwest and made that assignment what he called "the most instructive service I ever had, and the most interesting."[31]

text: In July 1938, Marshall was assigned to the War Plans Division in Washington D.C. and subsequently reassigned as Deputy Chief of Staff. In that capacity, then-Brigadier General Marshall attended a conference at the White House at which President Roosevelt proposed a plan to provide aircraft to England in support of the war effort, lacking forethought with regard to logistical support or training. With all other attendees voicing support of the plan, Marshall was the only person to voice his disagreement. Despite the common belief that he had ended his career, this action resulted in his being nominated by President Franklin Roosevelt to be the Army Chief of Staff. Upon the retirement of General Malin Craig on July 1, 1939, Marshall became acting chief of staff. Marshall was promoted to general and sworn in as chief of staff on September 1, 1939, the same day the German Army launched its invasion of Poland.[32] He would hold this post until the end of the war in 1945.

text: World War II[edit]

text: As Chief of Staff, Marshall organized the largest military expansion in U.S. history, inheriting an outmoded, poorly equipped army of 189,000 men and, partly drawing from his experience teaching and developing techniques of modern warfare as an instructor at the Army War College, coordinated the large-scale expansion and modernization of the U.S. Army. Though he had never actually led troops in combat, Marshall was a skilled organizer with a talent for inspiring other officers.[33]  Many of the American generals who were given top commands during the war were either picked or recommended by Marshall, including Dwight D. Eisenhower, Jacob L. Devers, George S. Patton, Terry de la Mesa Allen Sr., Lloyd Fredendall, Lesley McNair, Mark Wayne Clark and Omar Bradley.[34]

text: Expands military force fortyfold[edit]

text: Faced with the necessity of turning an army of former civilians into a force of over eight million soldiers by 1942 (a fortyfold increase within three years), Marshall directed General Lesley J. McNair to focus efforts on rapidly producing large numbers of soldiers. With the exception of airborne forces, Marshall approved McNair's concept of an abbreviated training schedule for men entering Army land forces training, particularly in regard to basic infantry skills, weapons proficiency, and combat tactics.[35][36]  At the time, most U.S. commanders at lower levels had little or no combat experience of any kind. Without the input of experienced British or Allied combat officers on the nature of modern warfare and enemy tactics, many resorted to formulaic training methods emphasizing static defense and orderly large-scale advances by motorized convoys over improved roads.[37]  In consequence, Army forces deploying to Africa in Operation Torch suffered serious initial reverses when encountering German armored combat units in Africa at Kasserine Pass and other major battles.[38]  Even as late as 1944, U.S. soldiers undergoing stateside training in preparation for deployment against German forces in Europe were not being trained in combat procedures and tactics in use there.[39]

text: Replacement system criticized[edit]

text: Originally, Marshall had planned a 265-division Army with a system of unit rotation such as practiced by the British and other Allies.[40]  By mid-1943, however, after pressure from government and business leaders to preserve manpower for industry and agriculture, he had abandoned this plan in favor of a 90-division Army using individual replacements sent via a circuitous process from training to divisions in combat.[40]  The individual replacement system devised by Marshall and implemented by McNair greatly exacerbated problems with unit cohesion and effective transfer of combat experience to newly trained soldiers and officers.[38][41] In Europe, where there were few pauses in combat with German forces, the individual replacement system had broken down completely by late 1944.[42]  Hastily trained replacements or service personnel reassigned as infantry were given six weeks' refresher training and thrown into battle with Army divisions locked in front-line combat.

text: The new men were often not even proficient in the use of their own rifles or weapons systems, and once in combat, could not receive enough practical instruction from veterans before being killed or wounded, usually within the first three or four days.[38][43][44]  Under such conditions, many replacements suffered a crippling loss of morale, while veteran soldiers were kept in line units until they were killed, wounded, or incapacitated by battle fatigue or physical illness. Incidents of soldiers AWOL from combat duty as well as battle fatigue and self-inflicted injury rose rapidly during the last eight months of the war with Germany.[38][41][43]  As one historian concluded, "Had the Germans been given a free hand to devise a replacement system..., one that would do the Americans the most harm and the least good, they could not have done a better job."[43][45]

text: Marshall's abilities to pick competent field commanders during the early part of the war was decidedly mixed. While he had been instrumental in advancing the career of the able Dwight D. Eisenhower, he had also recommended the swaggering Lloyd Fredendall to Eisenhower for a major command in the American invasion of North Africa during Operation Torch. Marshall was especially fond of Fredendall, describing him as "one of the best" and remarking in a staff meeting when his name was mentioned, "I like that man; you can see determination all over his face."  Eisenhower duly picked him to command the 39,000-man Central Task Force (the largest of three) in Operation Torch. Both men would come to regret that decision, as Fredendall was the leader of U.S. Army forces at the disastrous Battle of the Kasserine Pass.[34]

text: Planned invasion of Europe[edit]

text: During World War II, Marshall was instrumental in preparing the U.S. Army and Army Air Forces for the invasion of the European continent. Marshall wrote the document that would become the central strategy for all Allied operations in Europe. He initially scheduled Operation Overlord for April 1, 1943, but met with strong opposition from Winston Churchill, who convinced Roosevelt to commit troops to Operation Husky for the invasion of Italy. Some authors think that World War II could have ended earlier if Marshall had had his way; others think that such an invasion would have meant utter failure.

text: It was assumed that Marshall would become the Supreme Commander of Operation Overlord, but Roosevelt selected Dwight Eisenhower as Supreme Commander. While Marshall enjoyed considerable success in working with Congress and President Franklin D. Roosevelt, he refused to lobby for the position. President Roosevelt didn't want to lose his presence in the states. He told Marshall, "I didn't feel I could sleep at ease if you were out of Washington."[46]  When rumors circulated that the top job would go to Marshall, many critics viewed the transfer as a demotion for Marshall, since he would leave his position as Chief of Staff of the Army and lose his seat on the Combined Chiefs of Staff.[47]

text: On December 16, 1944, Marshall became the first American Army general to be promoted to five-star rank, the newly created General of the Army – the American equivalent rank to field marshal. He was the second American to be promoted to a five-star rank, as William Leahy was promoted to fleet admiral the previous day.

text: Throughout the remainder of World War II, Marshall coordinated Allied operations in Europe and the Pacific. He was characterized as the organizer of Allied victory by Winston Churchill. Time magazine named Marshall Man of the Year for 1943. Marshall resigned his post of chief of staff in 1945, but did not retire, as regulations stipulate that Generals of the Army remain on active duty for life.[5]

text: Analysis of Pearl Harbor intelligence failure[edit]

text: After World War II ended, the Congressional Joint Committee on the Investigation of the Pearl Harbor Attack received testimony on the intelligence failure. It amassed 25,000 pages of documents, 40 volumes, and included nine reports and investigations, eight of which had been previously completed. These reports included criticism of Marshall for delay in sending General Walter Short, the Army commander in Hawaii, important information obtained from intercepted Japanese diplomatic messages. The report also criticized Marshall's lack of knowledge of the readiness of the Hawaiian Command during November and December 1941. Ten days after the attack, Lt. General Short and Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, commander of the Navy at Pearl Harbor, were both relieved of their duties. The final report of the Joint Committee did not single out or fault Marshall. While the report was critical of the overall situation, the committee noted that subordinates had failed to pass on important information to their superiors, including Marshall.[48][49]

text: A secret report into the Army's role, the Clausen Report was authorised by Secretary Stimson; it was critical of Short and also of Colonel Bratton who, he concluded, arrived later on Sunday morning than he initially claimed during testimony and invented a story about not being able to get in touch with Marshall which "nearly destroyed" Marshall.

text: Post War: China[edit]

text: In December 1945, President Harry Truman sent Marshall to China, to broker a coalition government between the Nationalist allies under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek and Communists under Mao Zedong. Marshall had no leverage over the Communists, but he threatened to withdraw American aid essential to the Nationalists. Both sides rejected his proposals and the Chinese Civil War escalated, with the Communists winning in 1949. His mission a failure, he returned to the United States in January 1947.[50][51] Chiang Kai-shek and some historians later claimed that cease-fire, under pressure of Marshall, saved the Communists from defeat.[52][53] As Secretary of State in 1947–48, Marshall seems to have disagreed with strong opinions in The Pentagon and State Department that Chiang's success was vital to American interests, insisting that U.S. troops not become involved.

text: Secretary of State and Nobel Peace Prize[edit]

text: After Marshall's return to the U.S. in early 1947, Truman appointed Marshall Secretary of State. He became the spokesman for the State Department's ambitious plans to rebuild Europe. On June 5, 1947 in a speech[54] at Harvard University, he outlined the American proposal. The European Recovery Program, as it was formally known, became known as the Marshall Plan. Clark Clifford had suggested to Truman that the plan be called the Truman Plan, but Truman immediately dismissed that idea and insisted that it be called the Marshall Plan.[55][56] The Marshall Plan would help Europe quickly rebuild and modernize its economy along American lines. The Soviet Union forbade its satellites to participate.

text: Marshall was again named Time's Man of the Year for 1947. He received the Nobel Peace Prize for his post-war work in 1953, the only career officer in the United States Army to ever receive this honor.

text: As Secretary of State, Marshall strongly opposed recognizing the state of Israel. Marshall felt that if the state of Israel was declared that a war would break out in the Middle East (which it did in 1948 one day after Israel declared independence). Marshall saw recognizing the Jewish state as a political move to gain Jewish support in the upcoming election, in which Truman was expected to lose to Dewey. He told President Truman in May 1948, "If you (recognize the state of Israel) and if I were to vote in the election, I would vote against you."[57][58][59]  However, Marshall refused to vote in any election as a matter of principle.[60]

text: Marshall resigned from the State Department because of ill health on January 7, 1949, and the same month became chairman of the American Battle Monuments Commission.[7] In September 1949, Marshall was named president of the American National Red Cross.

text: Secretary of Defense[edit]

text: When the early months of the Korean War showed how poorly prepared the Defense Department was, President Truman fired Secretary Louis A. Johnson and named Marshall as Secretary of Defense in September 1950.  The appointment required a congressional waiver because the National Security Act of 1947 prohibited a uniformed military officer from serving in the post.  This prohibition included Marshall since individuals promoted to General of the Army are not technically retired, but remain officially on active duty even after their active service has concluded. General Marshall was the first person to be granted such a waiver, with Defense Secretary James Mattis being the second to receive it.  Marshall's main role as Secretary of Defense was to restore confidence and morale while rebuilding the armed forces following their post-World War II demobilization.

text: Korean War[edit]

text: Marshall worked to provide more manpower to meet the demands of both the Korean War and the Cold War in Europe.  To implement his priorities Marshall brought in a new leadership team, including Robert A. Lovett as his deputy and Anna M. Rosenberg, former head of the War Manpower Commission, as assistant secretary of defense for manpower.  He also worked to rebuild the relationship between the Defense and State Departments, as well as the relationship between the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

text: Marshall participated in the post-Inchon landing discussion that led to authorizing Douglas MacArthur to conduct operations in North Korea.  A secret "eyes only" signal from Marshall to MacArthur on September 29, 1950 declared the Truman administration's commitment: "We want you to feel unhampered strategically and tactically to proceed north of the 38th Parallel".[61]  At the same time, Marshall advised against public pronouncements which might lead to United Nations votes undermining or countermanding the initial mandate to restore the border between North and South Korea.  Marshall and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were generally supportive of MacArthur because they were of the view that field commanders should be able to exercise their best judgment in accomplishing the intent of their superiors.

text: Following Chinese military intervention in Korea during late November, Marshall and the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought ways to aid MacArthur while avoiding all-out war with China.  In the debate over what to do about China's increased involvement, Marshall opposed a cease–fire on the grounds that it would make the U.S. look weak in China's eyes, leading to demands for future concessions.  In addition, Marshall argued that the U.S. had a moral obligation to honor its commitment to South Korea.  When British Prime Minister Clement Attlee suggested diplomatic overtures to China, Marshall opposed, arguing that it was impossible to negotiate with the Communist government.  In addition, Marshall expressed concern that concessions to China would undermine confidence in the U.S. among its Asian allies, including Japan and the Philippines.  When some in Congress favored expanding the war in Korea and confronting China, Marshall argued against a wider war in Korea, continuing instead to stress the importance of containing the Soviet Union during the Cold War battle for primacy in Europe.

text: Relief of General MacArthur[edit]

text: Increasingly concerned about public statements from General Douglas MacArthur, commander of United Nations forces fighting in the Korean War, which contradicted President Harry S. Truman's on prosecution of the war, on the morning of 6 April 1951, Truman held a meeting with Marshall, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Omar Bradley, Secretary of State Acheson and advisor W. Averell Harriman to discuss whether MacArthur should be removed from command.

text: Harriman was emphatically in favor of MacArthur's relief, but Bradley opposed it. Marshall asked for more time to consider the matter. Acheson was in favor but did not disclose this, instead warning Truman that if he did it, MacArthur's relief would cause "the biggest fight of your administration."  At another meeting the following day, Marshall and Bradley continued to oppose MacArthur's relief.  On 8 April, the Joint Chiefs of Staff met with Marshall, and each expressed the view that MacArthur's relief was desirable from a "military point of view," suggesting that "if MacArthur were not relieved, a large segment of our people would charge that civil authorities no longer controlled the military."

text: Marshall, Bradley, Acheson and Harriman met with Truman again on 9 April. Bradley informed the President of the views of the Joint Chiefs, and Marshall added that he agreed with them.  Truman wrote in his diary that "it is of unanimous opinion of all that MacArthur be relieved. All four so advise."[62]  (The Joint Chiefs would later insist that they had only "concurred" with the relief, not "recommended" it.)

text: On April 11, 1951, President Truman directed transmittal of an order to MacArthur, issued over Bradley's signature, relieving MacArthur of his assignment in Korea and directing him to turn over command to Matthew Ridgway.  In line with Marshall's view, and those of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, MacArthur's relief was looked upon by proponents as being necessary to reassert the tenet of civilian control of the military.

text: Retirement[edit]

text: Marshall retired in September 1951 to his home, Dodona Manor, in Leesburg, Virginia to tend to his gardens and continue his passion for horseback riding. He was head of the American delegation at the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953.  He also served as Chairman of the American Battle Monuments Commission from 1949 to 1959.

text: Death and burial[edit]

text: Marshall died at Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, D.C. on October 16, 1959 at the age of 78. Although he was entitled to an Official Funeral, Marshall preferred simplicity, so received a Special Military Funeral after lying in state at the Washington National Cathedral for 21 hours, guarded by representatives from all the U.S. armed services, as well as a VMI cadet.[63] President Dwight D. Eisenhower ordered flags flown at half-mast, and was among the invited guests at the funeral service at the Fort Myer Old Post Chapel; other dignitaries included former President Truman,  Secretary of State Christian A. Herter, former Secretary of State Dean G. Acheson, W. Averell Harriman and Generals Omar N. Bradley, Alfred M. Gruenther and General Matthew B. Ridgway. His parish priest, Rev. Franklin Moss Jr. from St. James Episcopal Church  in Leesburg, Virginia conducted the chapel and graveside services, assisted by former chief chaplain and National Cathedral Canon Rev. Luther Miller. Following a 19-gun salute, Marshall was buried at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, in a place he had picked, in Section 7, Grave 8198, beside his first wife, Elizabeth Carter Coles (1875–1927) and her mother, Elizabeth Pendleton Coles (1849–1929); his second wife, Katherine Tupper Brown Marshall (1882–1978) would later join them.

text: Reputation and legacy[edit]

text: Marshall's reputation for excellence as a military organizer and planner was recognized early in his career, and became known throughout the Army.  In a performance appraisal prepared while Marshall was a lieutenant in the Philippines, his superior, Captain E. J. Williams responded to the routine question of whether he would want the evaluated officer to serve under his command again by writing of Marshall "Should the exigencies of active service place him in exalted command I would be glad to serve under him." (Emphasis added.)[64]

text: In 1913 General Johnson Hagood, then a lieutenant colonel, completed a written evaluation of Marshall's performance in which he called Marshall a military genius.  Responding to the question of whether he would want his subordinate Marshall to serve under him again, Hagood wrote "Yes, but I would prefer to serve under his command." (Emphasis added.)[65]  Hagood went on to recommend Marshall's immediate promotion to brigadier general, despite the fact that there were more than 1,800 officers, including Hagood, who were senior to him.[66]

text: After the surrender of the Nazi government in May 1945, Henry L. Stimson, the Secretary of War, paid tribute to Marshall in front of a gathering of members of the Army staff, concluding with "I have seen a great many soldiers in my lifetime and you, Sir, are the finest soldier I have ever known."[67]

text: In addition to his military success, Marshall is primarily remembered as the driving force behind the Marshall Plan, which provided billions of dollars in aid to post war Europe to restart the economies of the destroyed countries. In recent years, the cooperation required between former European adversaries as part of the Marshall Plan has been recognized as one of the earliest factors that led to formation of the European Coal and Steel Community, and eventually the European Union.[68]

text: In a television interview after leaving office, Harry S. Truman was asked which American he thought had made the greatest contribution of the preceding thirty years. Without hesitation, Truman picked Marshall, adding "I don't think in this age in which I have lived, that there has been a man who has been a greater administrator; a man with a knowledge of military affairs equal to General Marshall."[69]

text: Orson Welles said in an interview with Dick Cavett that "Marshall is the greatest man I ever met... I think he was the greatest human being who was also a great man... He was a tremendous gentleman, an old fashioned institution which isn't with us anymore."[70]

text: Family life[edit]

text: George Marshall was the youngest of three siblings.[71] His older brother Stuart Bradford Marshall (1875–1956) was a graduate of the Virginia Military Institute, and became a manager and executive in several metal production corporations, including the American Manganese Manufacturing Company.[72][73][74]  He later worked as a metallurgist and consulting engineer specializing in the production and operation of blast furnaces, coke ovens, and foundries.[75]  George and Stuart Marshall were long estranged; according to relatives, George Marshall's first wife, Lily, had dated other VMI cadets before him, and rejected their proposals, to include Stuart Marshall.[72]  When Stuart found out George was engaged to Lily, Stuart made unkind remarks about her, and George "cut him off my list".[72]  His sister, Marie Louise (1876–1962) was the wife of Dr. John Johnson Singer, an Army physician who died in 1934.[76]

text: Marshall married Elizabeth Carter Coles, or "Lily", at her mother's home on Letcher Avenue in Lexington, Virginia, on 11 February 1902.[77]  She died on 15 September 1927 after thyroid surgery that put significant strain on her weak heart.[78]  They did not have children.[79]

text: On 15 October 1930, Marshall married Katherine Boyce Tupper (8 October 1882 – 18 December 1978); [80][81]  Katherine Tupper was the mother of three children with Baltimore lawyer Clifton Stevenson Brown, who had been murdered by a disgruntled client in 1928.[82][83]  The second Mrs. Marshall was a graduate of the American Academy of Dramatic Arts; she later studied at the Comédie-Française, and toured with Frank Benson's English Shakespearean Company.[84]  She authored a memoir, 1946's Together: Annals of an Army Wife.[85]  One of Marshall's stepsons, Allen Tupper Brown, was an Army lieutenant who was killed by a German sniper in Italy on May 29, 1944. Another stepson was Major Clifton Stevenson Brown Jr. (1914–1952). Step-daughter Molly Brown Winn, who was the mother of actress Kitty Winn, was married to US Army Major James Julius Winn, who had been an aide to General Marshall.

text:
Marshall was a Freemason, having been made a Mason "at sight" in 1941 by the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia.
[86]

text: George Marshall maintained a home, known as Dodona Manor and later as The Marshall House, in Leesburg, Virginia.[87] This was his first and only permanent residence owned by Marshall who later said "this is Home...a real home after 41 years of wandering."[88] The restored home and its surrounding gardens are open to the public as a museum.

text: Fictional portrayals[edit]

text: Marshall has been played in film and television by

text:
Keith Andes in the 1970 film Tora! Tora! Tora!
Ward Costello in the 1977 film MacArthur
Dana Andrews in the 1979 film Ike, The War Years.
Norman Burton in the 1988 miniseries War and Remembrance.
Hal Holbrook in the 1989 television film Day One.
Harris Yulin in the 1995 television movie Truman.
Harve Presnell in the 1998 film Saving Private Ryan.
Scott Wilson in the 2001 film Pearl Harbor.
Donald Eugene McCoy in the 2009 Chinese movie The Founding of a Republic.
Richard DuVal in the 2012 Russian mini-series "Chkalov".

tag: ul

text: Marshall is a character in three different alternate history timelines in novels by Harry Turtledove: Worldwar, Joe Steele, and The Hot War.

text: Dates of rank[edit]

text:
No pin insignia in 1902

Second lieutenant, United States Army: February 2, 1901 (Appointment accepted on February 2, 1902.)

First lieutenant, United States Army: March 7, 1907

Captain, United States Army: July 1, 1916

Major, National Army: August 5, 1917

Lieutenant colonel, National Army: January 5, 1918

Colonel, National Army: August 27, 1918

Captain, Regular Army (reverted to permanent rank): June 30, 1920

Major, Regular Army : July 1, 1920

Lieutenant colonel, Regular Army: August 21, 1923

Colonel, Regular Army: September 1, 1933

Brigadier general, Regular Army: October 1, 1936

Major general, Regular Army: September 1, 1939

General, temporary, for service as Army Chief of Staff: September 1, 1939[89]

General of the Army, Army of the United States: December 16, 1944

General of the Army rank made permanent in the Regular Army: April 11, 1946

tag: table

text: Awards and decorations[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: U.S. military honors[edit]

text:
Distinguished Service Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster

Silver Star

Philippine Campaign Medal

World War I Victory Medal with four campaign clasps

Army of Occupation of Germany Medal

American Defense Service Medal

American Campaign Medal

World War II Victory Medal

National Defense Service Medal

text: Foreign orders[edit]

text:
Honorary Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath (United Kingdom)

Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour (France)

Grand Cross of the Order of Military Merit (Brazil) (Presented by General Francisco José Pinto on behalf of President Getulio Vargas on 3 June 1939)[91]

Grand Cross of the Order of Merit (Chile)

Grand Cross of the Order of Boyacá Cherifien (Colombia) (Given by President Ospina Perez as he opened the IX Panamerican Conference, March 1948)

Member 1st Class of the Order of Military Merit (Cuba)

Member 1st Class of the Order of Abdon Calderon (Ecuador)

Knight Grand Cross with swords of the Order of George I (Greece)

Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus (Italy)

Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Crown of Italy (Italy)

Grand Cross of the Order of Ouissam Alaouite (Morocco)

Knight Grand Cross with swords of the Order of Orange-Nassau (Netherlands)

Grand Officer of the Order of the Sun (Peru)

Member 1st Class of the Order of Suvorov (Soviet Union)

text: Foreign decorations and medals[edit]

text:
Croix de Guerre 1914-1918 with bronze palm (France, WWI)

Medal for the Centennial of the Republic of Liberia

Silver Medal for Bravery (Montenegro)

Medal of Solidarity, 2nd Class (Panama)

Queen Elizabeth II Coronation Medal (United Kingdom)

text: Civilian honors[edit]

text:
1943 - Awarded the American Legion's Distinguished Service Medal.
October 16, 1945 - presented with permanent membership in the Reserve Officers Association by President Harry Truman.
1946 - awarded the United States Congressional Gold Medal.[92]
1948 - awarded the Grand Lodge of New York's Distinguished Achievement Award for his role and contributions during and after World War II.
1953 - Nobel Peace Prize for the Marshall Plan.
1959 - Karlspreis (International Charlemagne Prize of the city of Aachen).
1965–1978 - The United States Postal Service honored him with a Prominent Americans series 20¢ postage stamp.

text: Namesakes[edit]

text:
1960 - George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, originally the Army Ballistic Missile Agency at Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, Alabama, became a NASA field center and was renamed.
The British Parliament established the Marshall Scholarship in recognition of Marshall's contributions to Anglo-American relations.
Many buildings and streets throughout the U.S. and other nations are named in his honor.
George C. Marshall Award, the highest award given to a chapter in Kappa Alpha Order.
George C. Marshall High School, founded in 1962 and located in Falls Church, Virginia, is the only public high school in the United States named for Marshall. The nickname of the school – "The Statesmen" – appropriately reflects his life and contributions.
George C. Marshall International Center, a non-profit organization that oversees Marshall's Leesburg home as a museum and works to interpret Marshall's legacy.
The Marshall Elementary School is in the Laurel Highlands School District, Uniontown, Pennsylvania.
George C. Marshall Elementary School: located in Vancouver, Washington.
The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
George Catlett Marshall Medal, awarded by the Association of the United States Army.  Awarded to Bob Hope in 1972.
The George C. Marshall Award, awarded to a citizen of Leesburg, Virginia who has demonstrated an exemplary commitment to the community.

text: Bibliography[edit]

text:
Behrman, Greg. The Most Noble Adventure: The Marshall Plan and How America Helped Rebuild Europe. New York: Free Press, 2008.
Cray, Ed. General of the Army: George C. Marshall, Soldier and Statesman. Norton, 1990. 847 pp.
Harold I. Gullan; "Expectations of Infamy: Roosevelt and Marshall Prepare for War, 1938–41." Presidential Studies Quarterly Volume: 28#3 1998. pp. 510+ online edition
Hein, David. "In War for Peace: General George C. Marshall's Core Convictions and Ethical Leadership". Touchstone 26, no. 2 (March/April 2013): 41–48.
Hein, David. "General George C. Marshall: Why He Still Matters." Marshall magazine (George C. Marshall Foundation, Lexington, VA), Fall 2016, pp. 12–17.
Jordan, Jonathan W., American Warlords: How Roosevelt's High Command Led America to Victory in World War II (NAL/Caliber 2015).
May, Ernest R. "1947–48: When Marshall Kept the U.S. Out of War in China". Journal of Military History 2002 66(4): 1001–10. ISSN 0899-3718
Levine, Steven I. "A New Look at American Mediation in the Chinese Civil War: the Marshall Mission and Manchuria." Diplomatic History 1979 3(4): 349–375. ISSN 0145-2096
Parrish, Thomas. Roosevelt and Marshall: Partners in Politics and War. 1989. 608 pp.
Forrest Pogue, Viking, (1963–87) Four-volume authorized biography: complete text is online
George C. Marshall: Education of a General, 1880–1939
George C Marshall: Ordeal and Hope, 1939–1943
George C. Marshall: Organizer of Victory 1943–1945
George C. Marshall: Statesman 1945–1959
Steele, Richard W. The First Offensive, 1942: Roosevelt, Marshall, and the Making of American Strategy. 1973. 239 pp.
Mark C. Stoler, George C. Marshall: Soldier-Statesman of the American Century.  (1989) 252pp
Unger, Debi and Irwin with Stanley Hirshson. George Marshall: a Biography. Harper, 2014. ISBN 9780060577193


document_title: United Nations Security Council

question_text: where is the security council of the un located

text: United Nations Security Council

text: History[edit]

text: Background and creation[edit]

text: In the century prior to the UN's creation, several international treaty organizations and conferences had been formed to regulate conflicts between nations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.[7] Following the catastrophic loss of life in World War I, the Paris Peace Conference established the League of Nations to maintain harmony between the nations.[8] This organization successfully resolved some territorial disputes and created international structures for areas such as postal mail, aviation, and opium control, some of which would later be absorbed into the UN.[9] However, the League lacked representation for colonial peoples (then half the world's population) and significant participation from several major powers, including the US, USSR, Germany, and Japan; it failed to act against the 1931 Japanese invasion of Manchuria, the Second Italo-Ethiopian War in 1935, the 1937 Japanese occupation of China, and Nazi expansions under Adolf Hitler that escalated into World War II.[10]

text: The earliest concrete plan for a new world organization began under the aegis of the US State Department in 1939.[11] Roosevelt first coined the term United Nations to describe the Allied countries."On New Year’s Day 1942, President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill, Maxim Litvinov, of the USSR, and T. V. Soong, of China, signed a short document which later came to be known as the United Nations Declaration and the next day the representatives of twenty-two other nations added their signatures."[12] The term United Nations was first officially used when 26 governments signed this Declaration. By 1 March 1945, 21 additional states had signed.[13] "Four Policemen" was coined to refer to the four major Allied countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and China, which was emerged in Declaration by United Nations[14] and became the foundation of an executive branch of the United Nations, the Security Council.[15]

text: In mid-1944, the delegations from the Allied "Big Four", the Soviet Union, the UK, the US and China, met for the Dumbarton Oaks Conference in Washington, D.C. to negotiate the UN's structure,[16] and the composition of the UN Security Council quickly became the dominant issue. France, the Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the UK, and US were selected as permanent members of the Security Council; the US attempted to add Brazil as a sixth member, but was opposed by the heads of the Soviet and British delegations.[17] The most contentious issue at Dumbarton and in successive talks proved to be the veto rights of permanent members. The Soviet delegation argued that each nation should have an absolute veto that could block matters from even being discussed, while the British argued that nations should not be able to veto resolutions on disputes to which they were a party. At the Yalta Conference of February 1945, the American, British, and Russian delegations agreed that each of the "Big Five" could veto any action by the council, but not procedural resolutions, meaning that the permanent members could not prevent debate on a resolution.[18]

text: On 25 April 1945, the UN Conference on International Organization began in San Francisco, attended by 50 governments and a number of non-governmental organizations involved in drafting the United Nations Charter.[19] At the conference, H. V. Evatt of the Australian delegation pushed to further restrict the veto power of Security Council permanent members.[20] Due to the fear that rejecting the strong veto would cause the conference's failure, his proposal was defeated twenty votes to ten.[21]

text: The UN officially came into existence on 24 October 1945 upon ratification of the Charter by the five then-permanent members of the Security Council and by a majority of the other 46 signatories.[19] On 17 January 1946, the Security Council met for the first time at Church House, Westminster, in London, United Kingdom.[22]

text: Cold War[edit]

text: The Security Council was largely paralysed in its early decades by the Cold War between the US and USSR and their allies, and the Council generally was only able to intervene in unrelated conflicts.[23] (A notable exception was the 1950 Security Council resolution authorizing a US-led coalition to repel the North Korean invasion of South Korea, passed in the absence of the USSR.)[19][24] In 1956, the first UN peacekeeping force was established to end the Suez Crisis;[19] however, the UN was unable to intervene against the USSR's simultaneous invasion of Hungary following that country's revolution.[25] Cold War divisions also paralysed the Security Council's Military Staff Committee, which had been formed by Articles 45–47 of the UN Charter to oversee UN forces and create UN military bases. The committee continued to exist on paper but largely abandoned its work in the mid-1950s.[26][27]

text: In 1960, the UN deployed the United Nations Operation in the Congo (UNOC), the largest military force of its early decades, to restore order to the breakaway State of Katanga, restoring it to the control of the Democratic Republic of the Congo by 1964.[28] However, the Security Council found itself bypassed in favour of direct negotiations between the superpowers in some of the decade's larger conflicts, such as the Cuban missile crisis or the Vietnam War.[29] Focusing instead on smaller conflicts without an immediate Cold War connection, the Security Council deployed the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority in West New Guinea in 1962 and the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus in 1964, the latter of which would become one of the UN's longest-running peacekeeping missions.[30][31]

text: On 25 October 1971, over US opposition but with the support of many Third World nations, the mainland, communist People's Republic of China was given the Chinese seat on the Security Council in place of Taiwan; the vote was widely seen as a sign of waning US influence in the organization.[32] With an increasing Third World presence and the failure of UN mediation in conflicts in the Middle East, Vietnam, and Kashmir, the UN increasingly shifted its attention to its ostensibly secondary goals of economic development and cultural exchange. By the 1970s, the UN budget for social and economic development was far greater than its budget for peacekeeping.[33]

text: Post-Cold War[edit]

text: After the Cold War, the UN saw a radical expansion in its peacekeeping duties, taking on more missions in ten years' time than it had in its previous four decades.[34] Between 1988 and 2000, the number of adopted Security Council resolutions more than doubled, and the peacekeeping budget increased more than tenfold.[35] The UN negotiated an end to the Salvadoran Civil War, launched a successful peacekeeping mission in Namibia, and oversaw democratic elections in post-apartheid South Africa and post-Khmer Rouge Cambodia.[36] In 1991, the Security Council demonstrated its renewed vigor by condemning the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on the same day of the attack, and later authorizing a US-led coalition that successfully repulsed the Iraqis.[37] Undersecretary-General Brian Urquhart later described the hopes raised by these successes as a "false renaissance" for the organization, given the more troubled missions that followed.[38]

text: Though the UN Charter had been written primarily to prevent aggression by one nation against another, in the early 1990s, the UN faced a number of simultaneous, serious crises within nations such as Haiti, Mozambique and the former Yugoslavia.[39] , the UN mission to Bosnia faced "worldwide ridicule" for its indecisive and confused mission in the face of ethnic cleansing.[40] In 1994, the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda failed to intervene in the Rwandan Genocide in the face of Security Council indecision.[41]

text: In the late 1990s, UN-authorised international interventions took a wider variety of forms. The UN mission in the 1991–2002 Sierra Leone Civil War was supplemented by British Royal Marines, and the UN-authorised 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was overseen by NATO.[42] In 2003, the US invaded Iraq despite failing to pass a UN Security Council resolution for authorization, prompting a new round of questioning of the organization's effectiveness.[43] In the same decade, the Security Council intervened with peacekeepers in crises including the War in Darfur in Sudan and the Kivu conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In 2013, an internal review of UN actions in the final battles of the Sri Lankan Civil War in 2009 concluded that the organization had suffered "systemic failure".[44] In November/December 2014, Egypt presented a motion proposing an expansion of the NPT (non-Proliferation Treaty), to include Israel and Iran; this proposal was due to increasing hostilities and destruction in the Middle-East connected to the Syrian Conflict as well as others. All members of the Security Council are signatory to the NPT.[45]

text: Role[edit]

text:
UN Security Council Resolutions

Sources:
UN Security Council · UNBISnet · Wikisource

1 to 100 (1946–1953)

101 to 200 (1953–1965)

201 to 300 (1965–1971)

301 to 400 (1971–1976)

401 to 500 (1976–1982)

501 to 600 (1982–1987)

601 to 700 (1987–1991)

701 to 800 (1991–1993)

801 to 900 (1993–1994)

901 to 1000 (1994–1995)

1001 to 1100 (1995–1997)

1101 to 1200 (1997–1998)

1201 to 1300 (1998–2000)

1301 to 1400 (2000–2002)

1401 to 1500 (2002–2003)

1501 to 1600 (2003–2005)

1601 to 1700 (2005–2006)

1701 to 1800 (2006–2008)

1801 to 1900 (2008–2009)

1901 to 2000 (2009–2011)

2001 to 2100 (2011–2013)

2101 to 2200 (2013–2015)

2201 to 2300 (2015–2016)

2301 to 2400 (2016–2018)

2401 to 2500 (2018–present)

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Portal:United Nations Security Council Resolutions

text: The UN's role in international collective security is defined by the UN Charter, which authorizes the Security Council to investigate any situation threatening international peace; recommend procedures for peaceful resolution of a dispute; call upon other member nations to completely or partially interrupt economic relations as well as sea, air, postal, and radio communications, or to sever diplomatic relations; and enforce its decisions militarily, or by any means necessary. The Security Council also recommends the new Secretary-General to the General Assembly and recommends new states for admission as member states of the United Nations.[46][47] The Security Council has traditionally interpreted its mandate as covering only military security, though US Ambassador Richard Holbrooke controversially persuaded the body to pass a resolution on HIV/AIDS in Africa in 2000.[48]

text: Under Chapter VI of the Charter, "Pacific Settlement of Disputes", the Security Council "may investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute". The Council may "recommend appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment" if it determines that the situation might endanger international peace and security.[49] These recommendations are generally considered to not be binding, as they lack an enforcement mechanism.[50] A minority of scholars, such as Stephen Zunes, have argued that resolutions made under Chapter VI are "still directives by the Security Council and differ only in that they do not have the same stringent enforcement options, such as the use of military force".[51]

text: Under Chapter VII, the Council has broader power to decide what measures are to be taken in situations involving "threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression".[27] In such situations, the Council is not limited to recommendations but may take action, including the use of armed force "to maintain or restore international peace and security".[27] This was the legal basis for UN armed action in Korea in 1950 during the Korean War and the use of coalition forces in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991 and Libya in 2011.[52][53] Decisions taken under Chapter VII, such as economic sanctions, are binding on UN members; the Security Council is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions.[54][55]

text: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court recognizes that the Security Council has authority to refer cases to the Court in which the Court could not otherwise exercise jurisdiction.[56] The Council exercised this power for the first time in March 2005, when it referred to the Court "the situation prevailing in Darfur since 1 July 2002"; since Sudan is not a party to the Rome Statute, the Court could not otherwise have exercised jurisdiction.[57][58] The Security Council made its second such referral in February 2011 when it asked the ICC to investigate the Libyan government's violent response to the Libyan Civil War.[59]

text: Security Council Resolution 1674, adopted on 28 April 2006, "reaffirms the provisions of paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document regarding the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity".[60] The Security Council reaffirmed this responsibility to protect in Resolution 1706 on 31 August of that year.[61] These resolutions commit the Security Council to take action to protect civilians in an armed conflict, including taking action against genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.[62]

text: Members[edit]

text: Permanent members[edit]

text: The Security Council's five permanent members, below, have the power to veto any substantive resolution; this allows a permanent member to block adoption of a resolution, but not to prevent or end debate.[63]

text:
Country
Regional group
Current state representation
Former state representation

 China
Asia-Pacific
 People's Republic of China (since 1971)
 Republic of China (1946–1949) (on the Mainland and Taiwan )
 Republic of China (1949–1971) (on Taiwan only)

 France
Western Europe
and Others
 French Fifth Republic (since 1958)
 Provisional Government of the French Republic (1945–1946)
 French Fourth Republic (1946–1958)

 Russia
Eastern Europe
 Russian Federation (since 1992)
 Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1946–1991)

 United Kingdom
Western Europe
and Others
 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (since 1946)
—

 United States
Western Europe
and Others
 United States of America (since 1946)
—

text: At the UN's founding in 1945, the five permanent members of the Security Council were the Republic of China, the French Republic, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States. There have been two major seat changes since then. China's seat was originally held by Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Government, the Republic of China. However, the Nationalists were forced to retreat to the island of Taiwan in 1949, during the Chinese Civil War. The Communist government assumed control of mainland China, thenceforth known as the People's Republic of China. In 1971, General Assembly Resolution 2758 recognized the People's Republic as the rightful representative of China in the UN and gave it the seat on the Security Council that had been held by the Republic of China, which was expelled from the UN altogether with no opportunity of membership as a separate nation.[32] After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russian Federation was recognized as the legal successor state of the Soviet Union and maintained the latter's position on the Security Council.[64] Additionally, France reformed its government into the French Fifth Republic in 1958, under the leadership of Charles de Gaulle. France maintained its seat as there was no change in its international status or recognition, although many of its overseas possessions eventually became independent.[65]

text: The five permanent members of the Security Council were the victorious powers in World War II[66] and have maintained the world's most powerful military forces ever since. They annually topped the list of countries with the highest military expenditures.[67] In 2013, they spent over US$1 trillion combined on defence, accounting for over 55% of global military expenditures (the US alone accounting for over 35%).[67] They are also among the world's largest arms exporters[68] and are the only nations officially recognized as "nuclear-weapon states" under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), though there are other states known or believed to be in possession of nuclear weapons.[69]

text: Veto power[edit]

text: Under Article 27 of the UN Charter, Security Council decisions on all substantive matters require the affirmative votes of nine members. A negative vote or "veto" by a permanent member prevents adoption of a proposal, even if it has received the required votes.[63] Abstention is not regarded as a veto in most cases, though all five permanent members must actively concur to amend the UN Charter or to recommend the admission of a new UN member state.[54] Procedural matters are not subject to a veto, so the veto cannot be used to avoid discussion of an issue. The same holds for certain decisions that directly regard permanent members.[63] A majority of vetoes are used not in critical international security situations, but for purposes such as blocking a candidate for Secretary-General or the admission of a member state.[71]

text: In the negotiations building up to the creation of the UN, the veto power was resented by many small countries, and in fact was forced on them by the veto nations – US, UK, China, France and the Soviet Union – through a threat that without the veto there will be no UN. Here is a description by Francis O. Wilcox, an adviser to US delegation to the 1945 conference: "At San Francisco, the issue was made crystal clear by the leaders of the Big Five: it was either the Charter with the veto or no Charter at all. Senator Connally [from the US delegation] dramatically tore up a copy of the Charter during one of his speeches and reminded the small states that they would be guilty of that same act if they opposed the unanimity principle. 'You may, if you wish,' he said, 'go home from this Conference and say that you have defeated the veto. But what will be your answer when you are asked: "Where is the Charter"?'"[72]

text: As of 2012, 269 vetoes had been cast since the Security Council's inception.[a] In this period, China (ROC/PRC) used the veto 9 times, France 18, USSR/Russia 128, the UK 32, and the US 89. Roughly two-thirds of Soviet/Russian vetoes were in the first ten years of the Security Council's existence. Between 1996 and 2012, China vetoed 5 resolutions, Russia 7, and the US 13, while France and the UK did not use the veto.[71]

text: An early veto by Soviet Commissar Andrei Vishinsky blocked a resolution on the withdrawal of French forces from the then-colonies of Syria and Lebanon in February 1946; this veto established the precedent that permanent members could use the veto on matters outside of immediate concerns of war and peace. The USSR went on to veto matters including the admission of Austria, Cambodia, Ceylon, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Laos, Libya, Portugal, South Vietnam, and Transjordan as UN member states, delaying their joining by several years. Britain and France used the veto to avoid Security Council condemnation of their actions in the 1956 Suez Crisis. The first veto by the US came in 1970, blocking General Assembly action in Southern Rhodesia. From 1985–90, the US vetoed 27 resolutions, primarily to block resolutions it perceived as anti-Israel but also to protect its interests in Panama and Korea. The USSR, US, and China have all vetoed candidates for Secretary-General, with the US using the veto to block the re-election of Boutros Boutros-Ghali in 1996.[73]

text: Non-permanent members[edit]

text: Along with the five permanent members, the Security Council has temporary members that hold their seats on a rotating basis by geographic region. Non-permanent members may be involved in global security briefings.[74] In its first two decades, the Security Council had six non-permanent members, the first of which were Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Poland. In 1965, the number of non-permanent members was expanded to ten.[75]

text: These ten non-permanent members are elected by the General Assembly for two-year terms starting on 1 January, with five replaced each year.[76] To be approved, a candidate must receive at least two-thirds of all votes cast for that seat, which can result in deadlock if there are two roughly evenly matched candidates. In 1979, a standoff between Cuba and Colombia only ended after three months and a record 154 rounds of voting; both eventually withdrew in favour of Mexico as a compromise candidate.[77] A retiring member is not eligible for immediate re-election.[78]

text: The African Group is represented by three members; the Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia-Pacific, and Western European and Others groups by two apiece; and the Eastern European Group by one. Traditionally, one of the seats assigned to either the Asia-Pacific Group or the African Group is filled by a nation from the Arab world.[79] Currently, elections for terms beginning in even-numbered years select two African members, and one each within Eastern Europe, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean. Terms beginning in odd-numbered years consist of two Western European and Other members, and one each from Asia-Pacific, Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean.[77]

text: The current elected members, with the regions they were elected to represent, are as follows:[76]

text:
Term
Africa
Asia-Pacific
Latin America
and Caribbean
Western Europe
and Other
Eastern Europe

2017

 Ethiopia

 Kazakhstan

 Bolivia
 Sweden
 Italy [80] [81]

2018
 Ivory Coast
 Equatorial Guinea
 Kuwait
 Peru
 Netherlands
 Poland

2019

text: The 2017–18 term will be the first time in over five decades that two members have agreed to split a term;[vague] otherwise intractable deadlocks have instead usually been resolved by the candidate countries withdrawing in favour of a third member state.

text: President[edit]

text: The role of president of the Security Council involves setting the agenda, presiding at its meetings and overseeing any crisis. The president is authorized to issue both presidential statements (subject to consensus among Council members) and notes,[82][83] which are used to make declarations of intent that the full Security Council can then pursue.[83] The presidency of the Council is held by each of the members in turn for one month, following the English alphabetical order of the Member States names.[84]

text: The list of nations that will hold the Presidency in 2018 is as follows:[85]

text:
Security Council Presidency in 2018

Country
Month

 Kazakhstan
January

 Kuwait
February

 Netherlands
March

 Peru
April

 Poland
May

 Russia
June

 Sweden
July

 UK
August

 USA
September

 Bolivia
October

 China
November

 Ivory Coast
December

text: Meeting locations[edit]

text: Unlike the General Assembly, the Security Council meets year-round. Each Security Council member must have a representative available at UN Headquarters at all times in case an emergency meeting becomes necessary.[86]

text: The Security Council generally meets in a designated chamber in the United Nations Conference Building in New York City, U.S. The chamber was designed by the Norwegian architect Arnstein Arneberg and was a gift from Norway. The mural painted by the Norwegian artist Per Krohg depicts a phoenix rising from its ashes, symbolic of the world's rebirth after World War II.[87]

text: The Security Council has also held meetings in cities including Nairobi, Kenya; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; Panama City, Panama; and Geneva, Switzerland.[86] In March 2010, the Security Council moved into a temporary facility in the General Assembly Building as its chamber underwent renovations as part of the UN Capital Master Plan.[88] The renovations were funded by Norway, the chamber's original donor, for a total cost of US$5 million.[89] The chamber reopened on 16 April 2013.[90]

text: Consultation room[edit]

text: Because meetings in the Security Council Chamber are covered by the international press, proceedings are highly theatrical in nature. Delegates deliver speeches to justify their positions and attack their opponents, playing to the cameras and the audience at home. Delegations also stage walkouts to express their disagreement with actions of the Security Council.[91] Due to the public scrutiny of the Security Council Chamber,[92] all of the real work of the Security Council is conducted behind closed doors in "informal consultations".[93][94]

text: In 1978, West Germany funded the construction of a conference room next to the Security Council Chamber. The room was used for "informal consultations", which soon became the primary meeting format for the Security Council. In 1994, the French ambassador complained to the Secretary-General that "informal consultations have become the Council's characteristic working method, while public meetings, originally the norm, are increasingly rare and increasingly devoid of content: everyone knows that when the Council goes into public meeting everything has been decided in advance".[95] When Russia funded the renovation of the consultation room in 2013, the Russian ambassador called it "quite simply, the most fascinating place in the entire diplomatic universe".[96]

text: Only members of the Security Council are permitted in the conference room for consultations. The press is not admitted, and other members of the United Nations cannot be invited into the consultations.[97] No formal record is kept of the informal consultations.[98][99] As a result, the delegations can negotiate with each other in secret, striking deals and compromises without having their every word transcribed into the permanent record. The privacy of the conference room also makes it possible for the delegates to deal with each other in a friendly manner. In one early consultation, a new delegate from a Communist nation began a propaganda attack on the United States, only to be told by the Soviet delegate, "We don't talk that way in here."[94]

text: A permanent member can cast a "pocket veto" during the informal consultation by declaring its opposition to a measure. Since a veto would prevent the resolution from being passed, the sponsor will usually refrain from putting the resolution to a vote. Resolutions are only vetoed if the sponsor feels so strongly about a measure that it wishes to force the permanent member to cast a formal veto.[93][100] By the time a resolution reaches the Security Council Chamber, it has already been discussed, debated, and amended in the consultations. The open meeting of the Security Council is merely a public ratification of a decision that has already been reached in private.[101][93] For example, Resolution 1373 was adopted without public debate in a meeting that lasted just five minutes.[93][102]

text: The Security Council holds far more consultations than public meetings. In 2012, the Security Council held 160 consultations, 16 private meetings, and 9 public meetings. In times of crisis, the Security Council still meets primarily in consultations, but it also holds more public meetings. After the outbreak of the Ukraine crisis in 2013, the Security Council returned to the patterns of the Cold War, as Russia and the Western countries engaged in verbal duels in front of the television cameras. In 2016, the Security Council held 150 consultations, 19 private meetings, and 68 public meetings.[103]

text: Subsidiary organs/bodies[edit]

text: Article 29 of the Charter provides that the Security Council can establish subsidiary bodies in order to perform its functions. This authority is also reflected in Rule 28 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure. The subsidiary bodies established by the Security Council are extremely heterogenous. On the one hand, they include bodies such as the Security Council Committee on Admission of New Members. On the other hand, both the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda were also created as subsidiary bodies of the Security Council. The by now numerous Sanctions Committees (see Category:United Nations Security Council sanctions regimes) established in order to oversee implementation of the various sanctions regimes are also subsidiary bodies of the Council.

text: United Nations peacekeepers[edit]

text: After approval by the Security Council, the UN may send peacekeepers to regions where armed conflict has recently ceased or paused to enforce the terms of peace agreements and to discourage combatants from resuming hostilities. Since the UN does not maintain its own military, peacekeeping forces are voluntarily provided by member states. These soldiers are sometimes nicknamed "Blue Helmets" for their distinctive gear.[104][105] The peacekeeping force as a whole received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1988.[106]

text: In September 2013, the UN had 116,837 peacekeeping soldiers and other personnel deployed on 15 missions. The largest was the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), which included 20,688 uniformed personnel. The smallest, United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), included 42 uniformed personnel responsible for monitoring the ceasefire in Jammu and Kashmir. Peacekeepers with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) have been stationed in the Middle East since 1948, the longest-running active peacekeeping mission.[107]

text: UN peacekeepers have also drawn criticism in several postings. Peacekeepers have been accused of child rape, soliciting prostitutes, or sexual abuse during various peacekeeping missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,[108] Haiti,[109] Liberia,[110] Sudan and what is now South Sudan,[111] Burundi and Ivory Coast.[112] Scientists cited UN peacekeepers from Nepal as the likely source of the 2010–2013 Haiti cholera outbreak, which killed more than 8,000 Haitians following the 2010 Haiti earthquake.[113]

text: The budget for peacekeeping is assessed separately from the main UN organisational budget; in the 2013–2014 fiscal year, peacekeeping expenditures totalled $7.54 billion.[107][114] UN peace operations are funded by assessments, using a formula derived from the regular funding scale, but including a weighted surcharge for the five permanent Security Council members. This surcharge serves to offset discounted peacekeeping assessment rates for less developed countries. In 2013, the top 10 providers of assessed financial contributions to United Nations peacekeeping operations were the US (28.38%), Japan (10.83%), France (7.22%), Germany (7.14%), the United Kingdom (6.68%), China (6.64%), Italy (4.45%), Russian Federation (3.15%), Canada (2.98%), and Spain (2.97%).[115]

text: Criticism and evaluations[edit]

text: In examining the first sixty years of the Security Council's existence, British historian Paul Kennedy concludes that "glaring failures had not only accompanied the UN's many achievements, they overshadowed them", identifying the lack of will to prevent ethnic massacres in Bosnia and Rwanda as particular failures.[116] Kennedy attributes the failures to the UN's lack of reliable military resources, writing that "above all, one can conclude that the practice of announcing (through a Security Council resolution) a new peacekeeping mission without ensuring that sufficient armed forces will be available has usually proven to be a recipe for humiliation and disaster".[117]

text: A 2005 RAND Corporation study found the UN to be successful in two out of three peacekeeping efforts. It compared UN nation-building efforts to those of the United States, and found that seven out of eight UN cases are at peace.[118] Also in 2005, the Human Security Report documented a decline in the number of wars, genocides and human rights abuses since the end of the Cold War, and presented evidence, albeit circumstantial, that international activism—mostly spearheaded by the UN—has been the main cause of the decline in armed conflict since the end of the Cold War.[119]

text: Scholar Sudhir Chella Rajan argued in 2006 that the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, who are all nuclear powers, have created an exclusive nuclear club that predominately addresses the strategic interests and political motives of the permanent members—for example, protecting the oil-rich Kuwaitis in 1991 but poorly protecting resource-poor Rwandans in 1994.[120] Since three of the five permanent members are also European, and three or four are predominantly white Western nations, the Security Council has been described as a pillar of global apartheid by Titus Alexander, former Chair of Westminster United Nations Association.[121]

text: The Security Council's effectiveness and relevance is questioned by some because, in most high-profile cases, there are essentially no consequences for violating a Security Council resolution. During the Darfur crisis, Janjaweed militias, allowed by elements of the Sudanese government, committed violence against an indigenous population, killing thousands of civilians. In the Srebrenica massacre, Serbian troops committed genocide against Bosniaks, although Srebrenica had been declared a UN safe area, protected by 400 armed Dutch peacekeepers.[122]

text: The UN Charter gives all three powers of the legislative, executive, and judiciary branches to the Security Council.[123]

text: In his inaugural speech at the 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in August 2012, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei criticized the United Nations Security Council as having an "illogical, unjust and completely undemocratic structure and mechanism" and called for a complete reform of the body.[124]

text: The Security Council has been criticized for failure in resolving many conflicts, including Cyprus, Sri Lanka, Syria, Kosovo and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, reflecting the wider short-comings of the UN. For example; At the 68th Session of the UN General Assembly, New Zealand Prime Minister John Key heavily criticized the UN's inaction on Syria, more than two years after the Syrian civil war began.[125]

text: Membership reform[edit]

text: Proposals to reform the Security Council began with the conference that wrote the UN Charter and have continued to the present day. As British historian Paul Kennedy writes, "Everyone agrees that the present structure is flawed. But consensus on how to fix it remains out of reach."[126]

text: There has been discussion of increasing the number of permanent members. The countries who have made the strongest demands for permanent seats are Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan. Japan and Germany, the main defeated powers in WWII, are now the UN's second- and third-largest funders respectively, while Brazil and India are two of the largest contributors of troops to UN-mandated peace-keeping missions.

text: Italy, the third main defeated power in WWII and now the UN's sixth-largest funder, leads a movement known as the Uniting for Consensus in opposition to the possible expansion of permanent seats. Core members of the group include Canada, South Korea, Spain, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Turkey, Argentina and Colombia. Their proposal is to create a new category of seats, still non-permanent, but elected for an extended duration (semi-permanent seats). As far as traditional categories of seats are concerned, the UfC proposal does not imply any change, but only the introduction of small and medium size states among groups eligible for regular seats. This proposal includes even the question of veto, giving a range of options that goes from abolition to limitation of the application of the veto only to Chapter VII matters.

text: Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan asked a team of advisers to come up with recommendations for reforming the United Nations by the end of 2004. One proposed measure is to increase the number of permanent members by five, which, in most proposals, would include Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan (known as the G4 nations), one seat from Africa (most likely between Egypt, Nigeria or South Africa), and/or one seat from the Arab League.[127] On 21 September 2004, the G4 nations issued a joint statement mutually backing each other's claim to permanent status, together with two African countries. Currently the proposal has to be accepted by two-thirds of the General Assembly (128 votes).

text: The permanent members, each holding the right of veto, announced their positions on Security Council reform reluctantly. The United States has unequivocally supported the permanent membership of Japan and lent its support to India and a small number of additional non-permanent members. The United Kingdom and France essentially supported the G4 position, with the expansion of permanent and non-permanent members and the accession of Germany, Brazil, India and Japan to permanent member status, as well as an increase in the presence by African countries on the Council. China has supported the stronger representation of developing countries and firmly opposed Japan's membership.[128]

text: In 2017, it was reported that the G4 nations were willing to temporarily forgo veto power if granted permanent UNSC seats.[129] In September 2017, U.S. Representatives Ami Bera and Frank Pallone introduced a resolution (H.Res.535) in the US House of Representatives (115th United States Congress), seeking support for India for a permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council.[130]