Developing the System of Collective Security Essay

Decent Essays

The system of Collective Security indisputably faces certain dilemmas and contradictions. It is clear that the premise of Collective Security still needs cautious legislation. It is only an evolving jurisprudence and its loose ends need to be tied up through concentrated deliberation. A system of Collective Security that would serve the purposes of keeping peace and would sustain continual international onslaught needs to be developed. A coping mechanism that would stand the test of time is of utmost necessity.

• QUESTIONS ABOUT ITS UTILITY: War theorists and strategists have questioned the workability of Collective Security. After World War II, there have been arisen 111 military conflicts so far, out of which only 9 have resulted …show more content…

It is true that sovereign states cannot be fully bound by pledges to act in some hypothetical future case. Most international situations are only prophesized now, and there often is no conclusive proof that such a situation threatening international peace may manifest itself.

• TENDING TOWARDS UTOPIA: As suggested in the beginning of this paper, the concept of Collective Security tends to be over-ambitious. German Sociologist Karl Mannheim reserves a special term for Collective Security – “Relative Utopia” – one that tries to be realistic but retains the elements of fantasy. It looks to bridge what might sometimes be unbridgeable. It seeks to civilize a world that constantly heads towards anarchy.

Moreover, hypocrisy is often attributed to the ideology of Collective Security, as it uses war to rid the world of war. Although the international theory of Liberalism comes close to advocating Collective Security as a means to a desirable end, the fact remains that Collective Security offers nothing new to the world. The entire system and process works akin to the process of immunization, which gets rid of micro organisms through another breed of micro organisms. Similarly, Collective Security only uses war as a vaccination against war, and this logic is certainly vulnerable to criticism. Although its ends are commendable, its means are definitely

Get Access