COLLECTIVE SECURITY SYSTEM IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS AND UNITED NATIONS

Abstract

The principle of balance of power failed in the maintenance of international peace and security in the outbreak of the First World War. This failure prompted the leading statesmen of that era to look for an alternative mechanism in the form of collective security system, first under the Covenant of the League of Nations in1919 and second in the Charter of the United Nations in 1945. These statesmen examined the weaknesses of the collective security in the League years and made improvement as to convert it into a supportive pillar of global peace in the experiment of the United Nations. This paper takes a look at the concept of collective security system in these epochs and made a comparative analysis of the system under the Covenant of the League of Nations and the Charter of the United Nations. The paper argues that the basic purpose of collective security is to prevent the growth of a formidable conflict or on failing that, to protect the intended victim, by means of collective action of peace- loving members of the international community. Using the analytical method and relying mainly on the available secondary materials, the paper used the cases of the invasion of China by Japan in the League era and the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in the United Nations years as case studies. The paper argues that collective security system is founded on the principle that an attack on any state will be regarded as an attack on all states and it finds its measures in the doctrine of ‘one for all and all for one’. The paper, based on its findings conclude that the essence of the concept is a mutual insurance among the state actors and for this premium, presumably receive coverage for its own security through the commitment made by the others.