| Abstract [eng] |
SUMMARY Collective Security: Theory and Practice The origins of collective security are found in the theories of “eternal peace”, and the first time in practice collective security have been realized in XIX century. Traditional conception defines collective security as universal or regional system, which is created to react collectively in the situation when one of the member states is attacked by other member. At present universal collective security system is realized through United Nations. The main purpose of United Nations is to maintain international peace and security. Collective security is one of the ways to maintain international peace and security. The mechanism of collective security is invoked to deal with situations, which are threats to the peace, acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace. Traditionally collective security was orientated to deal with situations, which involved the use of force. However in practice this has been modified. UN Security Council enjoys wide discretion – it can decide which situations should be regarded as threats to the peace, acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace. As the practice shows Security Council had invoked and decided to use collective measures also in situations which involved not only the use of force. Security Council decides which collective security measures should be used in order to maintain international peace and security. In practice Security Council developed and used great variety of collective measures – embargo, limitations of international travels, prohibitions of certain financial operations, military enforcement actions and etc. Modern mechanism of collective security is characterized by decentralization; military resources are given on ad hoc basis, therefore it strongly depends on member states’ solidarity and willingness to act. The newest tendencies suggest modifying collective security. It is suggested that poverty, epidemics, serious environmental problems should be regarded as “threat to peace” and therefore those situations should be dealt through the measures of collective security. International law experts point to the risk that the extended conception of collective security could negatively affect the sovereignty of member states. For example, there might be the increased number of interventions to states through the boarder understanding of collective security. However at present day neither the doctrine, nor the opinio juris of states fully supports such a broad interpretation of collective security. |
