Birleşmiş Milletler kuruluşundan bu yana özellikle 90’lı yıllardan sonra aktif olarak

The United Nations (UN) has adopted effective resolutions since its foundation, particularlyduring 1990’s, for the sake of promotion and protection of global peace andsecurity. Especially following the UN’s firm stance for the Yugoslavia crisis, the hopesfor global peace have remarkably raised. The Cold Was had come to the end and thestates from the opposite alliance blocks of the Cold War were enabled to make decisionsaltogether in order to protect global peace. In the UN Security Council’s practice, eventhe idea that the concept of “positive peace,” which regards the internal peace of states asa matter to be addressed by international community, could substitute the concept of “negativepeace,” which implies the peace situation only among states and does not regardinternal peace of states because of the main principle of non-intervention enacted in Article2/7 of the UN Charter. Nevertheless, these hopes could not last long. As Russia couldgather its strength after a short while, the decision-making mechanism of the internationalcommunity became solely interest-based once again. In this article, the author is trying toexamine the question whether the UN Security Council has endorsed the concept of “positivepeace” or “negative peace” while its approach to Mali case, which is a remarkableinternational crisis occurred in 2000’s.