NAME: MANTASHA KHAN

COURSE: BA(HONS) HISTORY

SEM: 5th
ROLL NO: 20BHS029
PAPER: INTRODUCTION TO
INTERNATIONAL RELATION
TOPIC: COLLECTIVE SECURITY
What is Collective Security?
Collective security is an arrangement or a policy that brings
together countries agreeing to a regional or global stand that
security was a tremendously pertinent issue requiring
fanatical attention. As such, these countries agree to get into
a collective role of responding to security threats and
breaches of the peace.
Collective Security is a device of crisis management which
postulates a commitment on the part of all the nations to
collectively meet an aggression that may be committed by
any state against another. War or aggression is viewed as a
breach of international peace and security and collective
security stands for collective action by all the nations in
defence of peace. Collective security stands for meeting any
war or aggression by the creation of a global preponderance
of power of all nations against the aggression.
Collective Security is also regarded as a deterrent against
aggression in so far as it lays down that the collective power
of all nations will be used to repel aggression or war against
any state. It is based on the principle, ‘Aggression against any
one member of the international community is an aggression
against international peace and security. As such it has to be
met by the collective efforts of all the nations’
Definition of Collective Security:
(1) “Collective Security is machinery for joint action in order
to prevent or counter any attack against an established
international order.” —George Schwarzenberger
(2) “Collective Security clearly implies collective measures for
dealing with threats to peace.” —Palmer and Perkins
(3) “In essence, Collective Security is an arrangement among
states in which all promise, in the event any member of the
system engages in certain prohibited acts (war and
aggression) against another member, to come to latter’s
assistance.” —Schleicher
In simple words, Collective Security system guarantees the
security of each state of the world against any war or
aggression which may be committed by any state against any
other state. It is like an insurance system in which all the
nations are bound to protect the victim of an aggression or
war by neutralizing the aggression or war against the victim.
NATURE OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY
OR
CHARACTERISTICS OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY
To know the nature or characteristic of collective security the
following two things must be kept in mind:

I)There is a close relationship between national security and

internstional security therefore, an attack on any single
nation shall be considered an attack on the total international

II) The aggressor will be faced by the collective power of all

the nations. All the nations westablish their collective
supremacy and will make use of their power against the
aggressor. This way Collective Security is the global device of
power management and maintenance of temational peace.

Following are the main characteristics or the nature of

Collective Security:
1. Device of Power Management-The basic objective of
Collective Security is the maintenance of international peace
and for this, Collective Security is a device of power
management for the maintenance of international peace and
security In International Politics, the concept of power has
special significance and famous writer Hans J. Morgenthau
has accepted it as central to international Politics. The basic
objective of collective security is the maintenance of peace
and the power is a method and a means of the maintenance
of international peace and security.

2. Maintenance of peace is the collective responsibility of all

the Nations
According to the principle of Collective Security, the
maintenance of peace is not the responsibility of a special
alliance or a particular nation, rather it is the collective
responsibility of all the nations. In other words, each nation
should contribute in the maintenance of remational peace
and security
3. Security of our nation is connected to International
Security
According to the principle of Collective Security, the security
of any single nation is connected to the international
security, so in case a nation is attacked by other nation, it
directly or indirectly effects all the abons of the world
Because of this reason, attack or threat of attack on any one
nation is looked into as an attack or threat of attack on the
entire world and is considered threat to international peace
4. Right to Self-Defence
The principle of Collective Security recognizes the right to
self-defence of every nation and it justifies any action taken
in self-defence, But it does not give the right to attack on
other nations.
5. All states are committed to pool their resources against
Aggression
According to the principle of Collective Security, in case of
aggression on any state, all the other states are committed to
pool their resources to oppose the aggression. Under such
circumstances,no state can shirk its responsibility
6. Respect of State's Sovereignty
The principle of Collective Security respects the sovereignty
of all the states. Every state whether it is big or small,
developed.or underdeveloped, powerful or weak has the
right to maintain its separate existence and no other state
can take away this right from him in other words, this
principle believes in the principle of equality of the states
7.Supporter of Global Preponderance of Power
The principle of Collective security is in favour of the
establishment of international peace by establishing global
preponderance of power. It does not accept the idea of the
neutrality of the state because neutrality means to turn away
from International responsibilities which does not go with
the principle of collective responsibility. All the states
establish their power preponderance collectively and make
use of it when need arises.
8. Collective Security is not an Alliance
Collective Security is not an alliance which is made to protect
the member nations or for self-defence. Under the principle
of Collective Security, all the nations act jointly and reject the
politics of alliances. According to them. alliances are threat to
international peace.

9. Presence of International Organisation is Essential

The principle of Collective Security, demands that there
should be an international organisation of the states under
which global power can be established and when need arises
this power can be used., Today, United Nations is such an
organisation which is entrusted the responsibility of the
maintenance of peace and if need arises, it can use power
against the aggressor state.

10. To maintain Status-Quo

The principle of Collective Security is not making any
important change in international relations, rather it is in
favour of maintaining the status quo-which means that the
position of each state should remain as it is.

11. It is a midway between Balance of Power and World

Government
The principle of the Collective Security is a middle way
between Balance of Power and World Government which
means it is bigger than the power established by Balance of
Power. But it is not as big as the concept of world
Government want to establish at international level.
12. Collective Security Is Deterrent
The concept of Collective Security is deterrent for the states
also because every state knows that if it attacked over the
other state, then t has to face the collective wrath of other
nations and no state is in a position to face the collective
action of other states. This way it acts as deterrent against
the aggressive thinking of a nation or a few nation.

13. Not States but wars are the enemies of Collective

Security
The objective of Collective Security is to establish peace at
international level, therefore, it opposes wars and not the
states. The only purpose of it is to stop aggressions and
whenever any state attacks the other, that becomes threat to
international peace. Under such conditions, all the other
states take collective action against the aggressor state.

14. Opposition to Neutrality

The concept of collective security opposes the idea d
neutrality Collective security is the collective responsibility of
all the nations to the maintenance of peace. In case any
nation does not join collective security or keeps itself
separate from then such a state is avoiding to play active role
in international politics. Such a state does not accept the idea
of collective security whereas we have read that the
collective security system is the practical form of the idea of
'One for all and all for one."

After reading the above written characteristics of Collective

Security, we come to the) conclusion that Collective Security
is a method of power management the purpose of which is
to establish international peace But this principle accepts
that the establishment of international peace is the collective
responsibility of all the nations and the national security of
each nation is linked to international security. Along with,
this principle respects the sovereignty of the states and gives
every state the right to self-defence. This principle does not
want to bring any change in the established international
order and believes in maintaining the status-quo. In brief, it is
deterrent for the establishment of international peace.
Ideal Conditions for the Success of Collective Security:
Collective Security system can successfully operate when
the following conditions are present in the international
system:
1. Agreement on the definition of Aggression.
2. More broad based and more powerful United Nations.
3. More powerful role of UN Security Council and strong
commitment of its permanent members in favour of
collective security of international peace and security.
4. Existence of a permanent international peace keeping
force.
5. An established procedure for termination of every
collective security action.
6. Popularization of peaceful means of conflict resolution.
7. Sustainable socio-economic development of all the
nations.
8. Strengthening of peaceful means of crisis-management
and international peacekeeping.

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY SYSTEM

As a device of securing international peace and security, the
concept of Collective Security has been widely criticized.
According to famous scholar Hans J. Morgenthau, Collective
Security System is not only unworkable but also an unwise
and dangerous principle which can lead to extension of a
local war into a world war"
The critics have given the following arguments against the
concept of Collective Security
1.United Nations is a Non-Sovereign Body
The Collective Security as a device of maintaining
international peace and security feels the need of an
international organisation and in 1945, this responsibility was
entrusted to United Nations. But United Nations is a non
sovereign body and to accept or not to accept its decisions
rest purely upto the member nations According to Kegley and
Wittkopf, "In short, sovereignty reigns supreme. The United
Nations is a concession to the independence of states, it was
not designed to supersede them by placing supranational
control on national initiatives"

2. Idealistic Concept
The concept of Collective Security is an idealistic and based
on maginary concept and so many hindrances come in the
way of its proper implementation. The concept of Collective
Security is based on the assumption that all the nations have
unanimous view on the subject of Collective Security,
whereas it is not correct All the nations have their own
interests, therefore, they think differently on different issues.
The concept of Collective Security is based on the principle of
All for one and One for All whereas it is an dealistic Idea
According to famous scholar Organski, "it is obviously
mistaken to believe that peace and security are universal
goals of the nations, over riding all others but in the normal
run of events, security can be taken for granted and peace is
only one of many national goals. It is sad but true fact that
when the interests of the great powers are not directly
threatened, aggressor may be left to devour their victims
undisturbed"

3. Absence of permanent Peace Keeping Force

Though Security Council is empowered to use force for the
maintenance of peace, yet there is no permanent force of the
United Nations which could be used on need. The security
force is constituted after the decision of Security Council and
many nations use fame excuses to lending forces and it
causes so many other problems. Sometimes the deployment
of security force is delayed to such an extent that the very
purpose of deployment gets defeated and the aggressor
nation akes full advantage of this situation. In the modern
age, the techniques of warfare have changed as a result of
which great damage is caused in the shortest possible time
and after hat forces are withdrawn.

4 Partial Decisions
The decisions of taking action under Collective Security
system is to be made by the Security Council and in case it
fails, then 'Uniting for Peace Resolution is passed by the
General Assembly with 2/3 majority and action is taken after
that. So, the first thing is that it takes long time in decision
making Secondly, sometimes the decisions made are partial.
During the Korean Crisis, the decisions became possible only
due to the boycott by Soviet Union of the meetings of
Security Council. The critics are of the opinion that in this
crisis, the objective of USA was less to establish peace and
was more to contain the spread of Communism. In this
action, other forces of only 16 countries had taken part
because it was taken as an American action against
communism.

5. Dominance of Powerful Nations

The basic principle of Collective Security is that all the states
should have equal say in arriving at collective decisions. In
fact the small states should have more say in Collective
Security as they are more dependent the Collective Security
than on their individual strength. There is no doubt that the
success or failure of Collective Security efforts is more
dependent on the support of powerful nations and these are
hesitant to put their power behind an effort which is not in
accordance with their national interests. We must remember
that the Collective Security action cannot succeed without
the participation of powerful nations as action against Iraq
was successful only due to active involvement of USA.

6. Difficult to Identify Aggressor

Under Collective Security action, sometimes it is difficult to
identify the aggressor and determine the nature of
aggression. The Charter of the United Nations allows the
member nations to take action in self-defence and many
times the aggressor tries to justify its action as defensive
action. In 1974, the General Assembly gave definition of
aggressor which was quite complicated and failed in its
purpose. Generally it is seen that the friendly countries of
aggressor do not accept him as an aggressor whereas the
enemies lable him as an aggressor. According to Organski,
"The accused nation itself, almost invariable devies the
charges claiming that it was provoked by the aggressive
actions of others. Friends of the aggressor agree, whereas
friends of the victim protests. The final verdict of history is
liable to depend upon who writes the account of the events"

7. Justifies war as a Means

The concept of Collective Security first denounces war and
considers it dangerous for international peace and security,
therefore, it believes in the world free of wars. But at the
same time, it accepts war as the right of nations for seb
defence. Besides this, it accepts that wars and aggressions
are bound to be practised international relations and the only
effective way to deal with such situation is to undertake not
individual war but collective war. As a result of this, a simple
local war can turn into a wond war
8. Cannot be used against big Powers
The machinery of Collective Security.cannd be used against
big powers who are usually responsible for many breaches of
peace. The small nations do not dare to indulge in war. The
big powers are also the members of Security Council where
decisions are taken regarding Collective Security measures.
By using vel power, any one of the big five can unilaterally
block measures taken in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter-Vil of the Charter of United Nations Military action in
Korean W became possible only due to the boycott of
Security Council meetings by the Soviet Union ar the issue of
China's membership
9. Unhelpful Environment
After the Second World War, the world got divided into two
blocs and the Cold War continued between these two groups
till 1991. The leader of hero groups wore Soviet Union on one
side and USA on the other and both these blocs different
perception on various intemational issues. At international
level, the environment doubt, mistrust, hatred and tension
prevailed and under such circumstances, the success
Collective Security was not only difficult but impossible,
According to George warzenberger, "Until the day when the
Easter and Western worlds no longer considers other as the
potential aggressor, Collective Security as envisaged under
the Charter of ed Nations must remain a dead letter".

10. No place for Neutrality during War

The concept of Collective Security does not pt neutrality
during war. The principle of Collective Security makes it
obligatory for all the nations to pool their resources and take
collective economic and military actions against an oppressor
or a nation which goes to war against another nation or in
other words, against whom Security Council decides to take
collective action. As such it rules out the status of neutrality
many nations prefer to opt in times of war. So, this principle
imposes obligation against the wishes of states which is not
right
While expressing his views about Collective Security,
V.V.Dyke has said, "Even if the Collective Security system was
established, it cannot be relied upon
11. Preference to National Interests
The national interests of different nations have also taken
preference over the collective security system and they use
lame excuses to send traces against their friendly countries.
But whenever any action is to be taken against their
apponent, they get ready immediately. Therefore, today
every nation gives preference to its traditional interests
whereas the collective security system does not accept this.
According to Organski, "This is incorrect assumption that all
nations are equally interested in stopping In fact, there are
always some nations that side with the aggressor and their
national interests are responsible for this
Conclusion-There is no doubt that there are many
weaknesses in the principle of Collective Security. United
Nations which has been entrusted with the responsibility to
enforce, is a non-sovereign body. Though in theory, all the
members nations of United Nations are given equal status,
yet we find the dominance of big powers in United Nations
and it has become a puppet in the hands of big powers,
Besides this, it is an organisation of sovereign states who are
not bound to obey its orders Generally it is seen that
decisions of United Nations which are in favour of certain
nations are accepted by these and which are not in favour
are not accepted. There are no permanent forces of United
Nations which may be asked when need arises. For this,
United Nations has to depend on member nations.
Many of the critics accept the concept of Collective Security
as concept of Collective insecurity because it has the
potential of converting a local war into world war. According
to Walter Lipman "The principle of Collective Security in
practice is not collective and does not bring security While
expressing similar views, Claude has said, "In certain basic
respect the doctrine of Collective Security is obsolete)
But in spite of all this, we cannot ignore the contribution of
the concept of Collective Security In spite of its weaknesses,
it has its own place in International Politics. Today, the
concept of Collective Security has beer. replaced by the
Peace Keeping Mission of the United Nations and in this field,
an important role is being played by the United Nations
Famous scholar Bennet has rightly said, "in the face of
Collective Security stalemate, the United Nations has devised
new methods for dealing with a limited range of threatening