u/WeirdTheory5675

The treaties define it has having the power to set non binding strategic agenda of the European union as a whole as well as providing suggestions for crisis and disputes between member states.

But what is the significance of this given than the comission , parliament and the other council already have legislative powers ? Why are their work programmes almost always based on the council strategic agenda ?

Un charter article 1 talks about international cooperation in solving international "economic , social , cultural and *humanitarian* problems

But what does it mean ? Does it share it's definition with IHL which applies during wartime or is it a broader concept since disaster relief is also a humanitarian activity.

The Covenant of the League of Nations contained a specific provision on the Red Cross in Article 25.

> "The Members of the League agree to encourage and promote the establishment and co-operation of duly authorised voluntary national Red Cross organisations having as purposes the improvement of health, the prevention of disease and the mitigation of suffering throughout the world."

This seems to be the only time a broader concept of humanitarianism was included in international law. Is this concept also shared in article 1(3) of the charter ?

One of the purposes of international telecommunication union is

> to promote the extension of the benefits of the new telecommunication technologies to all the world's inhabitants.”

According to article 1(d)

Article 34, by contrast, provides that Member States reserve the right, in accordance with their national law, to stop or cut off private telecommunications that appear dangerous to state security, contrary to law, public order, or decency. Which seems like a much broader exception than a specific exception in legal terms

It promotes cultural diversity and open communication for human rights and security. But it's these very aims that are treated as politicised

What does America believe is the end goal of unesco ?

> The purpose of the Organization is to contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among the nations through education, science and culture in order to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms which are affirmed for the peoples of the world, without distinction of race, sex, language or religion, by the Charter of the United Nations.

When broken down

1. > “The purpose of the Organization is to contribute to peace and security…”

This is presumably the ultimate end.

> “…by promoting collaboration among nations through education, science and culture…”

This is the means

3. > This gives the broader normative end (values/outcomes).

Idk if this is an ends or a means but it seems to be framed as the broader normative end

Is 1 and 3 both the end goals or is only 1 the end goal ? The preamble seems to heavily be leaning toward the idea that human rights are also a means towards the end of peace and security

Article 1(3) includes "achieving international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic , social , cultural and humanitarian charecter"

But how is it determined which problem is "international"

I've heard they aren't legally binding but if that's the case then what is the utility of such declarations or agreements ?