1

Chapter 1
Introduction

1.1 Introduction
The United Nations provides three pillars for the maintenance of peace: peaceful change the
pacific settlement of disputes, and collective security. Further the idea of collective Security
is that by pooling their and collectively organized international force and security. All will
co-operate in controlling a disturber of the peace. They will act as one for all and all for one.
Their combined power will serve as guarantee of the security of each. In the face of such
overwhelming strength, the theory goes; every nation will fulfill its international obligations
as it could not resist collective enforcement any way. The use of peaceful methods will be
stimulated greater trust among nations will be created and aggression will cease as an
obviously enterprise. The term, collective security has not been used either in the
covenant of the League of Nations or enforcement of international peace. Collective Security
is based on the principal that conflict among the members of the community affects the whole
community and unilateral violence against a member is crime against all the members. Thus
under it the idea is to maintain peace which is inherent on the basis of every political
community. The League of Nations deserves credit for starting the concept of collective
security.
1.2 Research Methodology: In making this project report the doctrinal method of
research has been used.

1.3 Focus area: This project report focuses on Collective Security and its International and
Regional approaches

1.4 Scope of the study: In this project report meaning of Collective Security, Provisions
of Collective Security under League of Nations and UN Charter, Role of NATO, SEATO,
CENTO and WARSAW PACT has been explained.



2


Chapter 2
Conceptual Analysis

2.1 Meaning and Nature of Collective Security:
According to George Schwarzeberger, Collective Security is a Machinery for joint action in
order to prevent or counter any attack against an established international order
(Schwarzenberger, 1951). The term implies collective measures for dealing with threat to
peace.
Van Dyke (1957) sees collective security as a system in which a number of states are bound
to engage in collective eorts on behalf of each others individual security. To A. K.
Chaturvedi (2006), collective security is an arrangement arrived at by some nations to
protect their vital interests, safety or integrity, against a probable threat or menace over a
particular period, by means of combining their powers.
From the above denitions by these eminent scholars, collective security can then be seen as
a plan for maintaining peace through an organization of sovereign states, whose members
pledge themselves to defend each other against attack. The concept is best seen as Security
for individual nation by collective means, that is, by membership in an international
organization made up of all or most of the states of the world pledged to defend each other
from attack. The idea of collective security was extensively discussed during the World War
I, and it took shape in the 1919 Covenant of the League of Nations, and again in the Charter
of the United Nations after World War II.
The principle of collective security is found in Article 48 and 49 of the Charter of the United
Nations which states that, the action required to carry out the decisions of the Security
Council for the maintenance of international peace and security shall be taken by all the
members of the United Nations or by some of them, as the Security Council may determine;
such decisions shall be carried out by the members of the United Nations directly or through
their action in the appropriate international agencies of which they are members. The idea
behind the collective security system is that members of the organization advancing the
collective security system (this time, the United Nations) are bound to spring to each others
defense in case of attack. The basic principle is that an attack on one is an attack on all. Any
3

state contemplating aggression would face the sure prospect of struggle not simply with the
prospective victim, but with all other members of the system, who would make any necessary
sacrice to save the state attacked.

2.2 Covenant of the League of Nations and Collective Security:
The covenant of the League of Nations under Articles 10 to 17 introduced the concept of
Collective Security. Following are the main provisions in this connection:
(i) Guarantee against aggression.- The covenant of the League of Nations provided
that the members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against
external aggression, the territorial integrity and existing political independence of
all members of aggression, council shall advise upon the means by which this
obligation shall be fulfilled.
(ii) Action in case of threat of war or war.- The Covenant of the league of Nations
provided that any war, whether immediately affecting any member of the League
or not, is hereby declared a matter of concern to the whole League and the League
shall take action that may be deemed wise and effectual to safeguard the peace of
nations.
(iii) Disputes to be submitted for settlement.- The members of the League agreed
that, if there should arise any dispute between them likely to lead to a rupture,
they will submit the matter either to arbitration of judicial settlement or to enquiry
by the Council and they agreed in no case to resort to war until 3 months after the
award by the arbitrators or judicial decision or the report by the Council. This
provision is very important because it for the first time imposed restrictions upon
the freedom of the states to resort to war at their will.
(iv) Implementation of the award or the judicial decision.- the members of the
League also agreed that they would carry out in full any award or decision that
might be rendered and they would not resort to war against a member of the
League which compiled therewith. In the event of any failure to carry out such an
award or decision, the Council could propose what steps should be taken to effect
thereto.
4

(v) Sanctions.- the Covenant of the League of nations contained important sanctions
under Article 16, which provided that should any member of the League resort to
war in disregard of its Covenant under Articles 12, 13 and 15, it shall ipso facto be
hereby undertake immediately to subject to the severance of all trade, financial
relations, the prohibition of all intercourse between their nations and the nations of
Covenant-breaking state, and prevention of all financial, commercial or personal
inter intercourse between the nationals of covenant-breaking State and the
prevention of all financial, commercial or personal intercourse between the
nationals of the covenant-breaking State and the nationals of any other state
whether a member of the League or not. Article 16 further provided: Any
member of the League which has violated any provision of the Covenant of the
League, may be declared to be no longer a member of the league by a vote of the
Council concurred in by the representatives of all other members of the League
represented.
It is clear from the above provisions that League of Nations made first important endeavor to
introduce the system of collective security. It is entirely a different matter that the collective
security system of the league could not succeed. The proof of the greatest failure was the
Second World War; failure of the collective security system was mainly due to the fact that
the members failed to abide by their solemn obligations which they undertook under the
League of Nations. However, it cannot be denied that there were certain defects and lacunas
in the collective security provided under the league. To mention only one constitutional
defect of the Covenant, although it imposed certain restrictions upon the right of the nation to
resort to war, it did not completely prohibit the war. That is to say, after exhausting the
provisions of articles 12, 13, and 15, the members could resort to war, after a lapse of 3
months, after the award by the arbitrators or the judicial decisions report by the council. The
United Nations gained immensely from the experience of the League of Nations and that is
why the system of collective Security provided under the United Nations is much more
effective than that of its predecessor, the League of Nations.



5



2.3 United Nations Charter and Collective Security:
Following are the main provisions which have built a system of a collective security under
the charter:
1. In the preamble of the charter, it has been resolved to save succeeding generations
from the scourge of war, which in our life time has brought untold sorrow to
mankind and for this end, to unite our strength to maintain international peace and
security.
2. It is one of the purposes of the united nations (under Article 1), to maintain
international peace and security, and to that end to take effective collective measures
for the prevention and removal of threats and to suppression of acts of aggression or
other breach of peace and to bring out by peaceful means, and in conformity with the
principles of justice in international law, adjustment or settlement of international
disputes or situation which might lead to a breach of peace.
3. It is one of the principles of the United Nations that, all members shall refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the
purpose of the united nations. As rightly remarked by Louis Henkin, in accordance
with this principle the charter ended the freedom of the states to resort to war at their
will.
4. Yet another principle of the United Nations is that all members shall give United
Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the charter, and
shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is
taking preventive or enforcement action.
5. Pacific settlement of disputes- the charter provides that parties to any dispute, the
continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and
security, shall first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial-settlement, resort to regional agencies or
arrangements or other peaceful means of their own choice. It is further provided that
the Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle
their disputes by such means. It is further provided that if the Security Council deems
6

that the continuance of any disputes is in fact likely to endanger the maintenance of
international peace and security, it shall decide whether to take action under article 36
or to recommend such terms of settlement as it may consider appropriate.
6. Binding effect of Security Council decision- members of the United Nations have
agreed to accept the carry out of the decision of the Security Council in accordance
with the present charter.
7. Enforcement or preventive action- chapter 7 of the charter deals with the enforcement
or preventive action and is most important chapter builds a system of collective
security. Following are some of the important of provisions this chapter:
(i) For any action to be taken under chapter 7, it is necessary that the Security Council
should first determine the existence of any threat of peace, breach of peace or act of
aggression. It is only after the security council has determine that a breach of peace or
an act of aggression has taken place, than it may take recommendations or decide
what measures shall be taken to maintain or to restore international peace and
security.
(ii) The security council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed forces
are to be employed to give effect to its decision and it may call upon the members of
the united nations to apply such measures which may include complete or partial
interruption of economics relation and rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphy, radio and other
means of communication and severance of diplomatic relations.
(iii)In case, the measures taken by the Security Council under article41 mentioned above,
proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be
necessary to maintain to restore international peace and security. Such action may
include demonstration, blockade and other operations by air, sea or land forces of the
members of the United Nations. These is the most important provision so far as the
collective security is concerned, because it empowers the security council to use even
armed forces for the maintenance of peace and security. As noted earlier, the
members have agreed to accept and carry out the decision of the Security Council.
Thus it is through the collective measures under this provision; the system of
collective security has been made very effective. It is further provided in the charter
that the members are under obligations to make available to the Security Council on
its call and in accordance with the special agreements armed forces, assistance and
faculties for the performance of maintaining international peace and security. It is
unfortunate that the provisions under this article have not been implemented.
7

(iv) It is further provided that there shall be military staff committee to advise and assist
the Security Councils military requirements for the maintenance of international
peace and security, the employment and command of forces placed at its disposal, the
regulation of armaments and possible disarmaments. It may be noted here that since
special agreements envisaged under article 43 for the availability of armed forces
could not be made these provision has also not been implemented and has become
more or less a defunct provision.
(v) It is further provided that the members of the United Nations shall join in affording
mutual assistance in carrying out the measures decided upon by the Security Council.
8. Individual and collective self-defense- Besides the above maintained provisions, the
charter of the United Nations under article 51 confers inherent right of individual or
collective self-defense upon the members of the United Nations. As pointed out by
prof. Julius Stone, the right of individual and collective self-defense is, however,
subject to the certain conditions- (i) if an armed attack takes place; (ii) the right exists
until security council takes any action; (iii) it shall be reported to the security council;
(iv) it is subject to make to the review by the security council; (v) these right cannot
affect the authority and responsibility of the security council, for the maintenance or
restoration of international peace and security; (vi) this right is limited to the members
of the united nations and is not available to the non-members.

2.4 Role of NATO, SEATO, CENTO and WARSAW PACT in the
Collective Security System:
NATO
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) established in 1949 to provide
protection against the Soviet threat and currently it has 28 member states. NATO military
activities carried out since the end of the Cold War. The great majority of these activities
were conducted not under the provisions of the Washington Treaty, and in particular Article
5, but rather on the basis of ad hoc decisions adopted by the North Atlantic Council in
accordance with the Alliance strategic doctrines. These developments did not amount to a
tacit revision of the Washington Treaty, nor rendered indispensable such a revision, although
ad hoc decisions could be considered as international accords concluded in simplified form.
Different legal grounds were invoked to justify not always convincingly these activities,
which consisted of peacekeeping operations, implementation of peace accords, and military
8

coercive measures. The most striking feature of NATO involvement in the management of
international crises, in any event, remains the progressive erosion of UN Security Council
authority, which culminated with the intervention in Kosovo. The recent crisis in Iraq,
however, demonstrates that there is no agreement among NATO members on whether
obtaining an authorization from the Security Council before resorting to force is a legal
requirement or a matter of political expediency. Attention will finally be paid to the activities
recently carried out under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, and in particular the naval
operations conducted on the Mediterranean Sea and the measures taken to protect Turkey in
the context of the United States led military campaign against Iraq.
SEATO
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), regional-defense organization from 1955 to
1977, created by the Southeast Asia Collective Defence Treaty, signed at Manila on Sept. 8,
1954, by the representatives of Australia, France, New Zealand, Pakistan,
the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The treaty came into
force on Feb. 19, 1955. Pakistan withdrew in 1968, and France suspended financial support in
1975. The organization held its final exercise on Feb. 20, 1976, and formally ended on June
30, 1977.
The formation of SEATO was a response to the demand that the Southeast Asian area be
protected against communist expansionism, especially as manifested through military
aggression in Korea and Indochina and through subversion backed by organized armed forces
in Malaysia and the Philippines. Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos (the successor states of
Indochina) were not considered for membership in SEATO for reasons that related to the
Geneva agreements of 1954 on Vietnam. These states were, however, accorded military
protection by a protocol. Other nations of South and Southeast Asia preferred to retain their
foreign policies of nonalignment.
The treaty defined its purposes as defensive only and included provisions for self-help and
mutual aid in preventing and countering subversive activities from without and cooperation in
promoting economic and social progress. SEATO had no standing forces but relied on the
mobile striking power of its member states, which engaged in combined military exercises.
CENTO
Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), formerly Middle East Treaty Organization,
or Baghdad Pact Organization, mutual security organization dating from 1955 to 1979 and
9

composed of Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom. Until March 1959 the
organization was known as the East Treaty Organization, included Iraq, and had its
headquarters in Baghdad.
Formed at the urging of Britain and the United States, the Central Treaty Organization was
intended to counter the threat of Soviet expansion into vital Middle East oil-producing
regions. It was never very effective. Iraq withdrew from the alliance in 1959 after its anti-
Soviet monarchy was overthrown. That same year the United States became an associate
member, the name of the organization was changed to CENTO, and its headquarters was
moved to Ankara. Following the fall of the shah in 1979, Iran withdrew, and CENTO was
dissolved.
WARSAW PACT
The Warsaw Treaty Organization (also known as the Warsaw Pact) was a political and
military alliance established on May 14, 1955 between the Soviet Union and several Eastern
European countries. The Soviet Union formed this alliance as a counterbalance to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a collective security alliance concluded between the
United States, Canada and Western European nations in 1949.
The Warsaw Pact supplemented existing agreements. Following World War II, the Soviet
Union had concluded bilateral treaties with each of the East European states except for East
Germany, which was still part of the Soviet occupied-territory of Germany. When the Federal
Republic of Germany entered NATO in early May 1955, the Soviets feared the consequences
of a strengthened NATO and a rearmed West Germany and hoped that the Warsaw Treaty
Organization could both contain West Germany and negotiate with NATO as an equal
partner. Soviet leadership also noted that civil unrest was on the rise in Eastern European
countries and determined that a unified, multilateral political and military alliance would tie
Eastern European capitals more closely to Moscow.
The original signatories to the Warsaw Treaty Organization were the Soviet Union, Albania,
Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, and the German Democratic Republic.
Although the members of the Warsaw Pact pledged to defend each other if one or more of
them came under attack, emphasized non-interference in the internal affairs of its members,
and supposedly organized itself around collective decision-making, the Soviet Union
ultimately controlled most of the Pact's decisions. The Soviet Union also used the Pact to
10

contain popular dissent in its European satellites, for example in Hungary in 1956, in
Czechoslovakia in 1968, and in Poland in 1981.
By the 1980s, the Warsaw Treaty Organization was beset by problems related to the
economic slowdown in all Eastern European countries. By the late 1980s political changes in
most of the member states made the Pact virtually ineffectual. In September 1990, East
Germany left the Pact in preparation for reunification with West Germany. By October,
Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland had withdrawn from all Warsaw Pact military
exercises. The Warsaw Pact officially disbanded in March and July of 1991 following the
dissolution of the Soviet Union.
2.5 Distinction between Collective Security and Collective Self-Defence:
It may be noted here that there is a difference between collective security and collective self-
defense. As pointed out by Hans Kelsen, Collective Security differs from collective self-
defense in so far as enforcement action taken by security council under chapter VII is the
intended reaction against the breach of peace committed through an act of aggression,
whereas the use of force in self-defense in intended by charter as provisional and temporary
until security council takes necessary measures and until collective security comes into action
and not a substitute for it. It has been pointed out earlier that under article 51 the right of
collective self-defense exists until Security Council takes any action. Thus it is provisional
and temporary. It comes to an end as soon as the Security Council takes any action. Moreover
it should not affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council for the
maintenance or restoration of international peace and security. In view of the provisions of
the charter discussed above, it is clear that the sanctions behind the collective security are
much stronger than that of collective self-defense. Collective self-defense is, in fact, an
exception to the principle of non-intervention incorporated in article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter
so far as collective security is concerned; Article 2(7) specifically provides that this principle
shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under chapter VII.



11



Chapter 3
Conclusion

Due to the conflict among the permanent members, the system of collective security has
failed to achieve the desired objectives. Because of the exercise of veto, Security Council
failed to fulfill the primary responsibilities of maintaining international peace and security.
Due to the failure of the Security Council to fulfill the responsibility entrusted to it under the
charter the general assembly assumed certain powers in the field of international peace and
security. But Congo experience has shown that even for the successful functioning of the
general assembly in this field, unanimity among major powers is essential. It has been
pointed out and rightly too, that the arguments in favor of the system are based on faculty or
incomplete assumptions. First, an essential assumption is the absolute irresistibility of the
accumulated force. A second assumption of the collective security system is doubtful,
namely, that all nations want international peace and security. What they really, want is peace
and security for themselves. A third difficulty that has been overlooked is that the
construction of a collective security system is the one of reaching agreement when action is
to be taken. Finally, the greatest difficulties can be experienced in determining collectively
what from the force is to be given. To conclude in the words of Francis O. Wilcox, the high
expectations of 1945 have collided had on with the hard realities of 1950s and 1960s. The
concept of collective security as it was envisaged in United Nations charter may not be
entirely dead but its blood pressure is very low and its heart beat is hardly discernible.