Types of Collective Security: An Examination of Operational Concepts

1955 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst B. Haas

“The well-bred, throbbing sound that goes on behind the Bauhaus façade of the United Nations,” notes Alistair Cook, “is not the air-conditioning. It is the pulse of politics.” Ever since its inception in 1919, international organization somehow has been expected to operate above and beyond politics. It was to enshrine the universal aspiration for peace and stability. That “politics” could intrude upon—and indeed shape—institutions set up for the maintenance of collective security is only now being recognized by the public at large. That recognition, in turn, seems responsible for much of the current disillusionment with the United Nations, since its implications sully the pure ideal of solidarity for peace.Ideologically speaking, our experience with collective security has rested on two basic concepts: the notion of “universal moral obligations” of the League Covenant and the concert of the big powers implicit and explicit in the United Nations Charter. Thus political values held by groups and individuals were translated into legal and institutional terms in the two universal collective security organizations. Both global efforts have failed to result in the peace expected of them; but the institutions rather than the concepts on which they were based have become the object of criticism and attack. No doubt the ideological convictions associated with the advent of international organization generally have militated in favor of the continued purity of the concepts. However, unless the concepts associated with world organization possess at once a high degree of descriptive accuracy and an analytical property permitting a measure of prediction, informed discussion of United Nations issues must be indefinitely postponed.

1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-477
Author(s):  
Donald C. Blaisdell

The articles of the United Nations Charter providing for the establishment of a Military Staff Committee and looking forward to provision for armed forces, assistance and facilities by Members introduced for many states new and perplexing problems in their relations to international organization. While it is true that military considerations are normally one of the factors influencing the formulation of the foreign policy of every state, never before has there existed one central international organization to which it was expected that all major political problems would be submitted, regardless of origin and regardless of the geographical area concerned. Coordination of military policy with political representation under these circumstances becomes, therefore, not a matter of the occasional conference at a given moment of international tension, but, instead, requires a day-to-day ìntegration in order to achieve both consistency and effectiveness.


1973 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-122
Author(s):  
R.A. Akindele

The simultaneous application of the principles of universality and regionalism to the organization of international peace and security has naturally created the political and constitutional problems of how to secure a workable and appropriate relationship between universal and regional organizations. It is a paradox of the twentieth century that while world peace like war has tended to become indivisible, international organization of security remains tied to the principle of division and imperfect coordination of responsibility between universal and regional instrumentalities.This article deals with the constitutional solutions adopted by the founders of the League of Nations and the United Nations to the problem of universal-regional relationship in international organization. Placing international constitution-making squarely within the context of the dynamic forces of international politics, the study identifies those political considerations bearing on the formulation of the constitutional relations between universal and regional organizations in both the League Covenant and the United Nations Charter. In addition, it emphasizes the important fact that the constitutional problems of international organization are inextricably related to the substantive problems of international politics.


1950 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 236-246
Author(s):  
Charles Chaumont

The security provisions of the contemporary system of international organization are based upon the principle of collective security. As it was originally stated in Article 16 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, “should any Member of the League resort to war in disregard of its covenants…it shall ipso facto be deemed to have committed an act of war against all other Members of the League.” On this principle of solidarity are equally founded the concepts of collective security included within the Charter of the United Nations.


1978 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mala Tabory

The United Nations Conference on International Organization (San Francisco, 25 April to 26 June 1945) initiated an era of quinquilingualism in the conduct of international organizational affairs, with Chinese, Russian, Spanish, English and French serving as its official languages, and the latter two as its working languages. The text of the United Nations Charter, according to Article 111, is authentic in these five languages. The distinction between official and working languages introduced at San Francisco set the pattern for linguistic practices at the United Nations. Each organ of the United Nations has since adopted language procedures suitable to its requirements, with the practices of the General Assembly initially following the pattern of the same two working languages and five official languages established at San Francisco. According to the rules of procedure of the General Assembly as in force until 1 January 1974, working languages were those in which verbatim records and the Journal were issued and into which all speeches were translated; as for the official languages, all resolutions, important documents and summary records were made available in them, and verbatim records and documents only upon the request of a delegation.Spanish was added to English and French as the third working language of the General Assembly on 7 December 1948. Two proposals for the inclusion of Russian and Chinese respectively among the working languages of the General Assembly were rejected in 1949. The General Assembly's rules of procedure were not further altered in this respect until 21 December 1968, when Russian was included among its working languages. An amendment submitted on that occasion by (Nationalist) China with a view to eliminating the distinction between official and working languages in the General Assembly and Security Council by granting Chinese the status of a working language was rejected. Chinese was included among the working languages of the General Assembly on 18 December 1973. At that point all five Charter languages acquired both official and working language status, and the distinction between the two classes of languages ceased to have practical relevance.


1951 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander W. Rudzinski

The veto question, one of the most controversial problems facing the United Nations, has several aspects of unequal importance. First, there is the great political problem of the relations between the great Powers on the one hand, and the small and middle-sized states on the other, as well as of their role in an international organization. This problem, being a political one, is reflected in the whole constitutional structure and functions of the organs of the United Nations. Second, there is the well-established traditional legal principle of equality of states, big and small, mighty and weak. This principle was reiterated in the United Nations Charter in Article 2 (1), which reads: “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.” Both these aspects of the veto question are well known and have been discussed to such an extent as to be entirely left aside in these remarks.


Author(s):  
Coralie Pison Hindawi

This chapter examines how the Security Council used its powers under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter to react to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression by Iraq against Kuwait. With the invasion and annexation of Kuwait in August 1990, Iraqi decision makers had to expect an international reaction. However, they surely could not anticipate that this move would place Iraq in the shadow of Chapter VII's enforcement measures for the two decades to come. This chapter explains how Iraq's invasion of Kuwait became a perfect opportunity to demonstrate the potential of the resurrected UN collective security system. It argues that rather than being reborn in Iraq after its demise during the Cold War, the UN collective security system was in fact buried again in Iraq as the Chapter VII regime became a trap from which the country had no chance to escape.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document