Topic: 2026 – Clarification of Article 51
Country: Brazil
Delegate Name: Carter Baar
In order to discourage direct conflict between Member States, the United Nations Charter gives the Security Council power over deciding “what measures not involving the use of armed forces are to be employed” (Charter of the UN). By doing this, the UN promotes diplomatic actions instead of outright violence through providing tools to do just that. Unlike Article 51, however, it is not constrained to just States, but also non-State members. Meaning that the Security Council is able to create sanctions on organizations and even individuals, not just Member States. In the modern world, this has been the new focus of sanctions, which poses a couple issues. Subcommittees, not the Security Council, are responsible for tracking said organizations and individuals that are on these sanction lists. This has raised doubts and concerns within nations that do not entirely trust the UN. Furthermore, the intensity of said sanctions are debated between Member States and cause tensions when it comes to lifting these sanctions and doubts for the effectiveness of the system. Such doubts are only exacerbated by the fact that there is only one subcommittee that works on releasing sanctions from those who fit the criteria, and the single one that exists only focuses on Al Queda. Additionally, the Security Council itself has researched the ineffectiveness of sanctions and the results are not at all flattering.
Brazil, however, still sees the use in sanctions. They know that it is useful to preserve peace while also giving Member States a platform to levy punishments, for the other alternative is often outright conflict. With this mindset, Brazil has implemented legislation facilitating the passing of sanctions encouraged by the United Nations (Eversheds Sutherland). Furthermore, Brazil does not support unilateral sanctions, that is sanctions imposed by singular States or a group of them that is not supported by the United Nations with the intention for economic or political coercion (Brazil joins Russia in criticising sanctions amid push for local currency trade). As such, Brazil does not impose any autonomous sanctions themselves although they don’t implement all UN proposed sanctions. Once again, this derives from their fear of Member States with more economic and political power. Additionally, it undermines the efficiency of UN imposed sanctions, which Brazil considers as a crucial diplomatic tool.
Despite Brazil’s widespread support for Sanctions, they do recognize the pitfalls of the subcommittees which deal with tracking people who are impacted by UN sanctions. As such, they support the bolstering of these subcommittees so that work is not slowed down and by extent supports less Security Council oversight over who is hired to prevent positions from being blocked due to a deadlock between Security Council members. Furthermore, Brazil is concerned about the potential corruption that is caused by such recruitment methods as well as the corruption that would appear within subcommittees dealing with individuals who are exempt from modern sanctions.
Works Cited
“Brazil joins Russia in criticising sanctions amid push for local currency trade.” bne Intellinews, 2026, https://www.intellinews.com/brazil-joins-russia-in-criticising-sanctions-amid-push-for-local-currency-trade-424878/. Accessed 10 2 2026.
“CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS.” United Nations Treaty Collection, 1945, https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf. Accessed 10 February 2026.
“Eversheds Sutherland.” Brazil, https://ezine.eversheds-sutherland.com/global-sanctions-guide/brazil. Accessed 10 2 2026.
