首页> 外文期刊>Harvard international law journal >Variable Multipolarity and U.N. Security Council Reform
【24h】

Variable Multipolarity and U.N. Security Council Reform

机译:可变多极化与联合国安理会改革

获取原文
       

摘要

One of the fundamental international law questions over the past two decades has been the structure of the United Nations Security Council. In a world of variable multipolarity, whereby changing crises demand different combinations of actors with relevant resources and shared interests, the Council's reform should be based not on expanded permanent membership-as mistakenly held by conventional wisdom-but on inclusive contextual participation in decisionmaking. The Council's five permanent members continue to have collective resources relative to the rest of the world that are not significantly different than at the founding of the United Nations, but are nonetheless insufficient due to the shifting crises. Thus, the Council needs to ensure flexibility of response and, depending on the context, engage with specific regional and local actors. In contrast, increased permanent representativeness (except for limited expansion to include India and Japan) would have little, if any, benefit in enabling the Council to better fulfill its responsibility across all crises and would merely risk increased deadlock. Moreover, the key issue for the international community is clarifying what common purpose the Council should serve. There is both a consensus within the international community that the Council's responsibility under Article 24 of the U.N. Charter should continue to be the maintenance of international peace and security, and a persistent lack of clarity as to the meaning of this obligation in specific crises. Due to the decentralized nature of the international community, without a single Sovereign, this uncertainty cannot be resolved by a purely political decision. Under international law, interpretation of the Council's purpose based on legal analysis of the text, context, and practice of Article 24 can be supplemented by recourse to norms of legitimacy emerging within the international community. If further agreement is reached on the Council's purpose-a process that gives primacy to persuasion and can be improved through certain reforms-the U.N. Charter already provides sufficient legal mechanisms to enable the Council to meet the contemporary expectations of the international community.
机译:过去二十年来,基本的国际法问题之一是联合国安全理事会的结构。在一个多极化的多变世界中,不断变化的危机要求行为者具有相关资源和共同利益的不同组合,安理会的改革不应基于常任理事国错误地扩大常任理事国数目,而应基于包容性的背景参与决策。安理会的五个常任理事国相对于世界其他地区仍然拥有集体资源,这些资源与联合国成立之初没有显着差异,但由于危机不断变化,这些资源仍然不足。因此,安理会需要确保应对的灵活性,并根据具体情况与特定的区域和地方行为体进行接触。相反,增加常任代表制(除了有限扩展以包括印度和日本),即使使安理会在所有危机中更好地履行其职责也无济于事,而只会陷入僵局。此外,国际社会的关键问题是澄清安理会应达到的共同目标。国际社会内部既有共识,即安理会根据《联合国宪章》第二十四条所承担的责任应继续是维护国际和平与安全,而且在具体危机中对这一义务的含义始终缺乏明确性。由于国际社会的分散性质,没有一个主权国家,这种不确定性无法通过纯粹的政治决定来解决。根据国际法,可以通过对国际社会中出现的合法性规范进行补充,以对第24条的案文,背景和惯例进行法律分析为基础,对安理会宗旨的解释。如果就安理会的目的达成进一步的协议-这一过程将说服力放在首位,并且可以通过某些改革加以改善-《联合国宪章》已经提供了足够的法律机制,使安理会能够满足国际社会的当代期望。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号