ブックタイトル佐藤栄作論文集9~16

ページ
43/912

このページは 佐藤栄作論文集9~16 の電子ブックに掲載されている43ページの概要です。
秒後に電子ブックの対象ページへ移動します。
「ブックを開く」ボタンをクリックすると今すぐブックを開きます。

ActiBookアプリアイコンActiBookアプリをダウンロード(無償)

  • Available on the Appstore
  • Available on the Google play
  • Available on the Windows Store

概要

佐藤栄作論文集9~16

第9回優秀賞With bi-polarity gone, coupled with the democratisation winds blowing across theworld, an alternative to reforming the Security Council would be to reconsider theentire conflict resolution mechanism in the United Nations by taking into account thatthe rest of the world ? other than the US, Britain, Russia, China and France ? alsohave a stake and, therefore, a role in maintaining international peace and security. Itis not reasonable any more to assume that because the five permanent to membersof the Security Council formed an alliance to win the last world war, they have amonopoly of wisdom and ability to maintain international peace and security.Ideally, a more democratic approach would be to have the UN General Assemblyplay a greater role. By the terms of the Charter, the General Assembly is assigneda relatively subsidiary role in the maintenance of world peace and security. It isto serve as a forum for public discussion and multilateral diplomacy designed toachieve the peaceful adjustment of unsatisfactory situations and the acceptance ofthe principles of cooperation(Murphy 1983: 14-15). A greater role for the GeneralAssembly would, therefore, require re-visiting the UN Charter so as to enhance thestatutory role of the General Assembly, and thereby bringing its conflict resolutionrole in line with the UN ideal that‘nations large and small’have equal rights.A second major challenge to the UN conflict resolution system in the post-ColdWar era is how to reconcile the need for humanitarian intervention in some states,with Article 2(4)of the Charter which provides for the inviolability of territorialintegrity and political independence of states.The collapse of the Soviet Union, and the disintegration of both Yugoslavia andSomalia have once again brought to the fore the debate about the extent to which theinternational community cannot legitimately intervene in the internal affairs of a state.On one hand, the conflicts in these disintegrating societies have resulted in major41