1. Conservative Approach: The conservative view considers the existing Charter "practically untouchable" and believes in improving "collective security" as defined in Chapter VII. Key positions include: US Position: Prioritizes its own interests, supports better management and the creation of an Inspector General, favours enlarging the Security Council (to include Germany and Japan, mainly for financing peace-keeping), and associates the UN with regional organizations like NATO for peace enforcement. The US remains reluctant to allow full application of Chapter VII and views collective security restrictively.
2. Secretary-General's Position (Boutros Ghali): Advocated for the full implementation of 'collective security' as envisaged in 1945, including the use of the Military Staff Committee (Article 47) and the conclusion of special agreements (Article 43) for providing armed forces. He also proposed 'peace enforcement units' under the command of the Secretary-General and wider use of 'preventive diplomacy'. The report candidly recognized the Security Council's incapacity to deal with threats from a major power.
Radical Approach: The radical approach criticizes the principles of the present system and proposes an overhaul. It reflects increasing doubts about the value of the Charter's collective security system, especially in intra-State conflicts. Radical proposals include:
* Establishing an Economic Security Council
* Modifying the Charter with less reluctance.
* Reforming the IMF and World Bank.
* Developing a new global security system (e.g., regional models like CSCE/CSCM).
* The creation of a consultative parliamentary assembly at the world level.
Future Outlook: The author asserts that no major or minor reform has any chance of being implemented now, primarily because the Charter's amendment procedures (requiring a two-thirds majority including all five permanent Security Council members) preclude agreement. However, he concludes that the continuing deterioration of the global situation, driven by economic integration, rising inequality, and intra-State conflicts, will inevitably lead the political establishment to define a new global institutional structure. This future debate will become highly political, opposing the defence of democracy and human rights against nationalism and fascism. (408 words)
(Summary of the article titled “The UN as an organisation. A critique of its functioning” by Maurice Bertrand, published in 6 EJIL (1995) pp-349-359)
UN Reform: Identifying the Primary Obstacle
This question asks us to identify the main, immediate difficulty preventing any changes, whether major or minor, to the United Nations (UN) structure, according to the provided critique.
Understanding UN Reform Approaches
The critique discusses two main perspectives on how to reform the UN:
- Conservative Approach: This view considers the existing UN Charter to be largely unchangeable. Reform efforts within this approach focus on improving existing mechanisms, particularly concerning 'collective security' as outlined in Chapter VII of the Charter. Different national positions, like that of the US, emphasize national interests and specific contributions, while the Secretary-General (Boutros Ghali) proposed fully implementing the original 1945 vision of collective security, including using specific articles of the Charter and establishing new units.
- Radical Approach: This perspective is more critical of the UN's current principles and suggests fundamental overhauls. Proposals include creating new bodies like an Economic Security Council, altering the Charter more readily, reforming international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, and developing entirely new global security systems or international parliamentary assemblies.
The Critical Barrier to Reform Implementation
The "Future Outlook" section of the article's conclusion directly addresses why reforms are not likely to be implemented at present. It explicitly states:
"no major or minor reform has any chance of being implemented now, primarily because the Charter's amendment procedures (requiring a two-thirds majority including all five permanent Security Council members) preclude agreement."
This highlights that the formal process for changing the UN Charter itself is the most significant and immediate hurdle. Specifically, to amend the Charter, the following conditions must be met:
- A vote of two-thirds of the member states in the UN General Assembly must approve the amendment.
- Crucially, this must be followed by ratification by two-thirds of the member states, which importantly *must include* all five permanent members of the Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States).
This requirement for the consensus of the P5 members on any Charter amendment makes achieving agreement exceptionally difficult, effectively blocking the implementation of reforms in the current global political environment. While other factors like public skepticism or debates on global governance are mentioned, the procedural requirement for Charter amendment is identified as the direct, insurmountable barrier preventing any reform from moving forward.
Similar Questions
- The author's view of Hohfeld's contribution to legal scholarship can best be described as:
- The phrase "literal inaccuracy in its every phrase" is used by the author to critique the Declaration's statement, suggesting a conflict between its rhetorical power and its:
- In formulating Principle VI (a), the ILC clarified the term "waging of a war of aggression" because:
- The debate within the International Law Commission regarding the creation of an international judicial organ (Part IV) centered on the following contrasting positions:
- Based on the passage, the primary problem the author identifies with the current discourse surrounding "rights" is the:
- The International Law Commission (ILC) concluded that its task, as directed by General Assembly resolution 177 (II), was primarily:
- Principle IV of the Nuremberg Principles concerning superior orders, differs from Article 8 of the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal by:
- The Tribunal, in its judgment, was constrained from making a general declaration that the acts of persecution and murder committed in Germany before 1939 were "crimes against humanity" primarily because:
- The author attributes the growing public frustration with the UN primarily to which pair of continuous failures?
- A primary point of divergence between the US Conservative position and the Secretary-General's Conservative position on security matters, according to the summary is:
Important Questions from Non Grammar
- The author's view of Hohfeld's contribution to legal scholarship can best be described as:
- The phrase "literal inaccuracy in its every phrase" is used by the author to critique the Declaration's statement, suggesting a conflict between its rhetorical power and its:
- In formulating Principle VI (a), the ILC clarified the term "waging of a war of aggression" because:
- The debate within the International Law Commission regarding the creation of an international judicial organ (Part IV) centered on the following contrasting positions:
- Based on the passage, the primary problem the author identifies with the current discourse surrounding "rights" is the:
