UN Collective Security: Effectiveness and Global Peacekeeping

Introduction

The concept of collective security is used by countries to end or avert conflicts. The arrangement of collective security provides that an attack against one nation has a ripple effect on other countries, and they should act as a unit to deter the attacker.¹ Once the Cold War ended, the primary issues of international security underwent significant changes. Through United Nations peacekeeping, several conflicts in Africa, Asia, and Central America were resolved. Peacekeeping is one of the central means by which the United Nations fulfills its role in maintaining security and peace internationally.² Both the United Nations and the League of Nations were established on the collective security principle. This paper examines how collective security has evolved as the foundation for most global peace agreements and assesses its effectiveness regarding peacekeeping.

Established on October 24, 1945, the United Nations succeeded the League of Nations as a versatile international organization with global range and participation.³ Before the Second World War, the League of Nations grappled with numerous challenges when mediating conflicts and ensuring security and peace on a global scale. However, as the conflict unfolded, the United States, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and China decided to develop a new international organization to assist in the management of global affairs. Initially, the UN was conceptualized as states uniting against Japan, Italy, and Germany. The initial steps in designing the UN and establishing its functions and decision-making structures were undertaken by the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States.⁴ The three states confronted various issues, including the infamous "veto problem," with disagreement arising over the most appropriate voting system.

The headquarters of the United Nations is in New York, with regional offices in Nairobi, Vienna, and Geneva. The UN Charter stipulates its goals, which include saving future generations from the scourge of conflict, restating confidence in basic human liberties, establishing conditions that support justice and respect for the responsibilities arising from international law and treaties, and encouraging social advancement and a better quality of life.⁵ Besides peace and security maintenance, the UN also focuses on establishing friendly associations among nations founded on respect for the principles of autonomy and equal rights, and on attaining global collaboration in solving humanitarian, cultural, social, and economic issues. Moreover, it supports and upholds human rights and functions as a center where nations can coordinate their activities and actions toward achieving these primary goals.

Modifications in the role of the UN and its decision-making apparatus were associated with transformations in international relations strategies. In its first 45 years, the UN's security function was profoundly affected by Cold War tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States.⁶ The widespread decolonization after the Second World War in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa amplified the nature and volume of social, economic, and political concerns that challenged the organization. In 1991, after the Cold War came to an end, the United Nations received renewed demands and attention.⁷ With a growing and unstable geopolitical climate, the UN was faced with new issues that called for the establishment of new functions and practices, particularly in the humanitarian and conflict resolution domain. The UN, its associated agencies, and its programs encountered numerous challenges at the start of the twenty-first century when addressing civil wars and humanitarian crises, international terrorism, and the unexpected flow of refugees.⁸

Since collective security was the basis for the UN, member states were to abide by imposed self-defense limitations that support its primary goal. They relied on the belief that the collective security scheme would provide them with national security protection in exact measure as the powers they had agreed to renounce.⁹ The concept of collective security is very different from the reactive approaches of engaging in war for instant state benefits. However, the UN Charter acknowledges the inherent right of self-defense, both collectively and individually. Member states have consistently employed this right as a means of avoiding binding obligations. In recent years, the collective security concept has come under intense scrutiny due to how this right has been employed in the "War on Terror."¹⁰ Concerns arise from the conflicting interpretation of the collective security concept. For instance, the United States holds a broader interpretation of Article 51 of the UN Charter — which permits collective self-defense — across a range of situations, whereas the International Court of Justice (ICJ) applies a more restrictive reading of Article 51's provisions. Consequently, the essentiality of the collective security concept has been overshadowed by the controversy surrounding collective self-defense.

Evolution of the Collective Security Concept

The United Nations was founded on the collective security doctrine. The Chapter VII provisions of the UN Charter have been the foundations of the multilateral safekeeping system envisioned by the sponsoring UN member states in 1945.¹¹ The multilateral security system has been regarded as essential for peace preservation since the end of the Second World War, and it stands among the fundamental components of contemporary international law, incorporating the concepts of sovereign equality and the non-use of force between countries.

The primary function of collective security is to assist in the evolution of peaceful international relations. The collective security idea was first raised before the First World War. Article 17 of the Osnabrück treaty provided that every contracting party is responsible for defending and maintaining peace.¹² In 1919, the League of Nations was established and adopted collective security concepts within a global system for averting war. The collective security system thereby became the crowning principle of both the League of Nations and the succeeding United Nations.

Collective Security Mechanism

The collective security system assures every country globally of security against aggression or war that another nation may commit.¹³ It is analogous to an insurance system in which all states are bound to protect the victim of war or aggression by countering it. Presently, collective security is considered the most favorable strategy for international peace. It is designed to protect security and peace and to counter aggression and war globally. Aggression and war are considered threats to international security and peace, and collective security supports all nations in their attempts to defend peace.¹⁴ The fundamental principle of collective security is that aggression or war against any member state of the international community is an aggression against global security and peace. Counteractive measures therefore entail the collective response of all nations.

Collective security is primarily about institutionalizing an international police force against breaches and abuses of order that can result in insecurity. In this arrangement, states collaborate to provide security for all against any action by a UN member state that may threaten the rest of the countries.¹⁵ Through the collective security system, the UN seeks to deter any member state from acting in a way that would threaten peaceful coexistence and thereby circumvent conflict.

For the collective security arrangement to be efficient, it must be solid enough to withstand belligerence from any authority or combination of powers. Ideally, the principle entails nations being willing to apply sanctions or even go to war whenever necessary.¹⁶ Collective security can only be practical if all member states are simultaneously prepared to threaten the aggressor with sanctions or to fight. Furthermore, nations must be willing to acknowledge their obligations and act in good faith.

Collective security is founded on four principles: that all nations use force only in self-defense; that peace is indivisible when one country is attacked; that nations agree to unite to stop war and restore peace; and that they provide the resources or material required to establish collective security dynamism — connected to the United Nations — to counter aggressors and restore peace.¹⁷ The collective security code is provided in Articles 48 and 49 of the UN Charter, which state that the actions needed to carry out Security Council decisions for maintaining international peace and security shall be the responsibility of some or all UN member nations, either directly or through other suitable international agencies of which they are members.¹⁸

The collective security system's underlying idea maintains that UN members have the responsibility to counter any form of attack. The fundamental principle is that attacking one nation is effectively attacking all nations. As such, any nation contemplating war against a member state will face not only the potential victim but also all other members of the system.¹⁹ In theory, the collective security concept assumes that its member states will maintain an overpowering superiority and that they will be committed to its principles without reservation, especially when aggression is unjustified and must be repelled.

Conclusion

Collective security is considered a security arrangement whereby a group of nations agrees to collaborate on counteractive actions against threats to their territorial and economic sovereignty. The world has shrunk into a global village, and states have been subjected to one international body. The function of international organizations is to serve as a superior force overseeing relations between individual nations. International bodies like the UN and the League of Nations were formed from this idea and were likewise founded on the collective security concept.

Member states agreed to certain restrictions on collective self-defense. The concept of collective security is distinct from retaliatory strategies of engaging in war for immediate national benefit. While the concept was well conceived as a means of enhancing world security, not all countries have cooperated with one another. Collective security was adapted to deter nations from entering into conflicts because of the consequences they risked — including sanctions and other enforcement measures as provided by the UN Security Council.

At present, member states are employing the concept of self-defense to circumvent the obligations binding them under the United Nations framework. This has gained a degree of legitimacy, in part because of the UN's inability in the modern era to apply collective security against non-state actors who fund terrorism. The concept of collective security has also been challenged by the superpowers, who hold conflicting views about the state of the world. The United Nations cannot act against powerful nations that exercise their veto whenever they are dissatisfied with any of the organization's decisions. Therefore, while the collective security concept was well conceived and its objective of ensuring global peace and security remains crucial in the present day, the structural limitations that constrain the functions of the United Nations must be addressed to ensure that its aims are achieved and that the world moves closer to becoming a war-free place.