Still the Best Hope for Peace. the U.N. Charter

By Raskin, Marcus | The Nation, September 21, 1985 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Still the Best Hope for Peace. the U.N. Charter

Raskin, Marcus, The Nation

Still the Best Hope for Peace

Nowhere is it more obvious that the United Nations is a creature of nation-states--primarily the superpowers--than in the area of security and disarmament. The United Nations cannot effect disarmament unless the great powers agree; however, the U.N. process can create an important political momentum in behalf of disarmament and the work of peace movements. The United Nations is the place where governments feel they must speak out against apartheid and for disarmament and economic development. It is a place where, more often than not, nations prove La Rochefoucauld's maxim that hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue.

This exercise can have positive political results. Statements, pronouncements and resolutions can (and have) become legitimizing instruments for peace and human rights movements across the world. That political fact should be understood in the dialectics of debate over disarmament and secuirty. Peace activists, scholars and statesmen should not fall into the trap of thinking that the United Nations is by nature irrelevant to security and disarmament. After all, the framers of the U.N. Charter sought to assert the organization's centrality rather than its marginality in international affairs.

The United Nations grew out of the grand military alliance of World War II, and it was generally assumed that the United States would be the senior partner in rebuilding the international system. Forty years ago empires were falling from one end of the earth to the other. Some 50 million people had been killed; America had dropped atomic bombs on Japan in a prologue to the cold war. It was little wonder that the first article of the Charter states that the united Nations' fundamental purpose is "to maintain international peace and security.' That objective was to be attained with "the least diversion for armaments of the world's human and economic resources.' A permanent U.N. police force coupled with general disarmament was to achieve world peace. Under Article 47 of the Charter, the Security Council's Military Staff Committee was given the responsibility of formulating international security plans, which would be implemented through the United Nations by the great powers with the consultation and assent of the small nations. The committee has ritually met since 1948 to discuss a permanent armed force, but nothing has come of its deliberations.

Indeed, the concept of a U.N. police force has not been taken seriously by member nations since the early 1960s. In 1964, Brian Urquhart, now Under Secretary General for Special Political Affairs, championed the idea of an international peacekeeping system but argued against such a force: "The institutional addition at this time of a permanent international police force would in all probability worsen the state of international politics, and it might, by is very existence or through precipitate and inappropriate use, complicate the very situation it was designed to solve.' The formation of such a force would, in any case, make little sense unless a comprehensive disarmament was also achieved.

The drafters of the Charter granted to the Security Council the powers to decide whether to use force, and the General Assembly had only an advisory role. However, the idea that all the member natons could authorize collective measures was pressed by the United states in 1950, when North Korean forces invaded South Korea. Unable to obtain the Security Council's approval for sending in U.N. troops, America introduced the Uniting for Peace resolution in the General Assembly, authorizing an international force in Korea. That action seemd to signal a new role for the General Assembly, but Washington would find that it had created a monster. By 1958, the Third World countries had achieved a majority in the General Assembly, at which point official U.S. disenchantment with the United Nations began.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Still the Best Hope for Peace. the U.N. Charter


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?