Define “Collective Security”. How Is This Principle Articulated in the Aims of the United Nations and Has That Organisation Been Successful in Achieving Those Aims?
When considering this idea of collective security one cannot view it as a single entity as many derived forms exist. Instead this essay will strive to consider each of these possible derivatives and analyse how this applies to the UN to uncover which one they implement. To discover if collective security is articulated in their aims the UN charter will be examined to see whether it actually does bring about a plausible form of security or whether it lacks in certain areas due to contradiction and its writing being post-war. In addition to this, modern case studies can be used to uncover if the UN has been successful is achieving the aims laid out in the charter or whether they have become dated in today’s global politics.
When trying to define this concept of collective security one would think that a clear, simple definition would exist so that upon any discussion of security issues, it would allow the people involved to have a concise understanding of the notion, thus avoiding any ambiguity and confusion. However, as if so often the case, this has been far more challenging to achieve and even ‘academics and so-called experts in legal departments and diplomatic services, are guilty of perpetrating and propagating the confusion surrounding the concept.’ The problem faced is that the term “collective security” can be easily broken down into two parts, whereby this idea of “security” can be viewed as a prevention of any form of conflict that could affect the current state of peace on any level. “Collective,” on the other hand, is seen as more than one state acting together to maintain this, through the means of agreeing and adhering to a certain set of rules. Therefore, we could draw the conclusion that the combination of both of these would lead to the understanding that collective security is ‘any multilateral arrangement or action taken in the name of defence, peace and morality.’ The difficulty faced is that beyond this point of understanding ‘many forms
When trying to define this concept of collective security one would think that a clear, simple definition would exist so that upon any discussion of security issues, it would allow the people involved to have a concise understanding of the notion, thus avoiding any ambiguity and confusion. However, as if so often the case, this has been far more challenging to achieve and even ‘academics and so-called experts in legal departments and diplomatic services, are guilty of perpetrating and propagating the confusion surrounding the concept.’ The problem faced is that the term “collective security” can be easily broken down into two parts, whereby this idea of “security” can be viewed as a prevention of any form of conflict that could affect the current state of peace on any level. “Collective,” on the other hand, is seen as more than one state acting together to maintain this, through the means of agreeing and adhering to a certain set of rules. Therefore, we could draw the conclusion that the combination of both of these would lead to the understanding that collective security is ‘any multilateral arrangement or action taken in the name of defence, peace and morality.’ The difficulty faced is that beyond this point of understanding ‘many forms