Monday, 11 October. The challenges of globalization and current times should not be met with stereotypes of the past, he stressed.
Since , no State had changed more or sought the change of "this unsustainable and unjust world order with more courage and dedication than Cuba", he added. The dilemma of developing countries was whether, in the future, under certain circumstances and procedures, to accept or to stop being subject to intervention by a handful of Powers that had economic and military monopoly, he said. Cuba wished to express that it would never be intervened in, because that was the sovereign will of its people.
Cuba understood the reality of a globalized world and would work hard toward the globalization of justice, development and solidarity. But under conditions of "a unipolar and neoliberal world order", financial blackmail against the United Nations, the Security Council's double standards and tyranny by some members, among other issues, Cuba felt it would be suicidal to endorse the right to global intervention already exercised in Kosovo.
To be able to act, the United Nations must urgently democratize itself. The General Assembly must resolutely exercise its powers, even in the field of conflicts, and the Security Council must be expanded with equitable representation from developing countries. Stressing the absolute validity and inviolability of the United Nations Charter, he said the concept of so-called humanitarian intervention, as displayed in Kosovo, was a violation of the Charter and of international law.
Cuba rejected any acts of force not supported by the Charter. While Cuba agreed with the importance of creating a culture of prevention at the United Nations, the first step was for all Member States to reach mutual a understanding on the practical implications and methods to be applied to embark on that culture.
Not enough had been said on the principle of consent and too much on the imposition of peace, he said. In a world where justice and equity prevailed, peace could not be imposed, but was attained through development, equal opportunities for every citizen, the absence of corruption, and the ensurance of people's true participation in designing their own destiny. In more serious cases, the United Nations might even assume part of the governmental administration. Preventive diplomacy and peace-building interventions would tend to involve the United Nations far more deeply than before in the internal affairs of States, she said.
She said, however, that her delegation agreed with the Secretary-General that it was necessary to be more innovative in approaches to problems relating to massive and systematic human rights violations.
Turning to humanitarian challenges, she said that while humanitarian assistance was an immediate response, it was at the same time a necessary step towards full recovery, rehabilitation and development. Attacks on humanitarian personnel continued to pose major problems and all efforts must be exerted by countries, particularly host countries, to ensure the safety of all personnel involved in humanitarian assistance.
In noting the intention of the Secretary-General that savings derived from efficiency measures would be placed in the Development Account and made available for additional projects, she stressed that the transfer of resources associated with productivity gains into the Development Account should not be a budget reduction exercise, should not result in involuntary separation of staff and should not affect the full implementation of all mandate programmes and activities.
Regarding the critical financial situation of the United Nations, she called upon Member States, in particular the major contributor, to settle their arrears without further delay and to pay their future assessments in full and on time. Equally important was the Secretary-General's readiness to give back to the Organization its central role in the pursuit of peace and security. Also critical were efforts to transform the United Nations into a more integrated and sharply focused organization.
Adapting it to the modern world required a rapid and unequivocal response by Member States. The report had rightly highlighted certain global responses which were flawed, fragmented or narrow-minded. The Organization's role in preventing conflicts needed to be sharpened, and the essential links between its political objectives and development work needed to be further developed.
He drew attention to five other aspects of the report: natural disasters; the new global environment; the Organization's financial health; Security Council reform; and the advancement of peace and sustainable development in Africa. A stronger response to natural disasters required the further development of early warning systems. The new global environment required more systematic cooperation between the United Nations and protagonists engaged in advancing political and economic security on all levels, including those beyond State borders.
In that respect, progress made in the dialogue between the Organization and the Bretton Woods institutions was welcome. On the financial health of the Organization, which had not improved over the past year, he said that States currently in arrears were causing considerable harm to the international community as a whole, preventing the Organization from carrying out its mandate and were dangerously complicating its reform.
The process of Security Council reform should avoid unproductive confrontations and persistent procrastination. On the situation in Africa, his delegation supported the appeal for more organized and outgoing efforts.
Indeed, the world had witnessed many catastrophes in the past year, including violence in East Timor; ethnic cleansing in Kosovo; and the thousands of children in Sierra Leone who had been mutilated by rebels, abducted from parents, and forced to use drugs or serve as soldiers. The United Nations had been founded to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, and its Charter had established a system for collective security, but security was not only a matter of States, but of individuals.
The lives of too many had been threatened, and too many had been persecuted and oppressed. He said the important principle of national sovereignty could not be used as a curtain behind which violations of human rights were carried out with impunity. Individual security was as important as State security. Too often, the security of a State was used to undermine the security of a people. The Secretary-General had referred to the collective conscience of humanity. To Sweden, that conscience also implied an obligation to take action where the security of individuals was imperilled.
The United Nations was the obvious forum for dealing with such situations. In the field of conflict prevention, it already had several instruments at its disposal.
The more difficult question was how the international community should treat violent disputes if those occurred within a country, he went on. It needed to balance respect for national sovereignty with seeking to improve individual security everywhere. Security threats within State borders should not hinder the Organization from taking action, as an internal dispute might well constitute a threat to international peace and security and warrant action by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter.
In that connection, the Security Council should have taken a decision to halt the actions of President Slobadon Milosevic.
A common framework must be found as a basis for action by the United Nations to curtail a humanitarian catastrophe.
He said his delegation supported ongoing efforts to restore the Council's authority and to expand its membership, in order to better serve the interests and security of all peoples. The time had come to turn that widely shared belief into concrete action. With regards to that solidarity, Senegal felt that States needed to increasingly hone their abilities in preventing crises and tragedies.
It was also up to the international community to care for the needs of victims of wars and disasters by acting effectively and without discrimination, there had to be a genuine culture of communication which would allow effective responses to humanitarian crises. The Security Council must become more credible and democratic, he said. Only the United Nations could respond in a diplomatic manner in situations of conflict. Senegal stressed its faith in the United Nations in the conduct of peacekeeping operations around the world.
His country also believed that strengthened interaction between the United Nations and regional organizations could reduce the occurrence of conflicts.
He recommended integrating the concept of the culture of peace in attempts to rebuild following conflicts. Efforts should be made to redouble investments and growth to eliminate developing countries' debt problems in an arena of globalization, he added. It was necessary to secure the authorization of the Security Council for any use of force against States. European integration began in , when six states formed the European Coal and Steel Community in the Treaty of Paris. The community established joint international authority over the coal and steel industries of these six countries, entailing executive control through a permanent bureaucracy and a decision-making Council of Ministers composed of foreign ministers of each state.
This same model was expanded to a general economic zone in the Treaty of Rome in It was enhanced by a judicial body, the European Court of Justice, and a legislature, the European Parliament, a directly elected Europe-wide body.
They are no longer absolutely sovereign. In recent years, European integration has continued to advance in important respects. However, strains on European integration have emerged in recent years as well. Then, in , a referendum in the United Kingdom resulted in a victory for the U. This circumscription of the sovereign state, through international norms and supranational institutions, finds a parallel in contemporary philosophers who attack the notion of absolute sovereignty.
Their thought is not entirely new, for even in early modern times, philosophers like Hugo Grotius, Alberico Gentili, and Francisco Suarez, though they accepted the state as a legitimate institution, thought that its authority ought to be limited, not absolute.
The cruel prince, for instance, could be subject to a disciplining action from neighboring princes that is much like contemporary notions of humanitarian intervention. Two of the most prominent attacks on sovereignty by political philosophers since World War II came in the s from Bertrand de Jouvenel and Jacques Maritain.
In his prominent work of , Sovereignty: An Inquiry Into the Political Good , Jouvenel acknowledges that sovereignty is an important attribute of modern political authority, needed to quell disputes within the state and to muster cooperation in defense against outsiders. But he roundly decries the modern concept of sovereignty, which creates a power who is above the rules, a power whose decrees are to be considered legitimate simply because they emanate from his will.
As his description of Hobbes intimates, Jouvenel views early modern absolute sovereignty with great alarm. But rather than calling for the concept to be abrogated, he holds that sovereignty must be channeled so that sovereign authority wills nothing but what is legitimate.
Far from being defined by the sovereign, morality has an independent validity. This was the understanding of authority held by the ancien regime, where effective advisers to the monarch could channel his efforts towards the common good.
What can channel the sovereign will today? Jouvenel seems to doubt that judicial or constitutional design is alone enough. Rather, he places his hope in the shared moral concepts of the citizenry, which act as a constraint upon the choices of the sovereign.
In Chapter Two of his enduring work of , Man and the State , Jacques Maritain shows little sympathy for sovereignty at all, not even the qualified sympathy of Jouvenel:. Rather than representing the people and being accountable to it, the sovereign became a transcendent entity, holding the supreme and inalienable right to rule over the people, independently of them, rather than representing the people, accountable to them.
This is idolatry. Any transfer of the authority of the body politic either to some part of itself or to some outside entity — the apparatus of the state, a monarch, or even the people — is illegitimate, for the validity of a government is rooted in its relationship to natural law.
Sovereignty gives rise to three dysfunctionalities. First, its external dimension renders inconceivable international law and a world state, to both of which Maritain is highly sympathetic. Second, the internal dimension of sovereignty, the absolute power of the state over the body politic, results in centralism, not pluralism.
Third, the supreme power of the sovereign state is contrary to the democratic notion of accountability. Witnessing the rise of the formidable entity of the state, they sought to place limits on its power and authority. The case for circumscribing sovereignty remains strong in the Catholic and other Christian traditions. In recent years, political philosophers in the liberal tradition have argued for the circumscription of sovereignty as well.
Two examples are Thomas Pogge , and , — and Allen Buchanan Both accord sovereignty an important but not an absolute moral status, seeking to make room for possibilities such as humanitarian intervention approved by the United Nations and the more robust development of global institutions for fighting poverty.
A Definition of Sovereignty 2. The Rise of the Sovereign State: Theory and Practice Supreme authority with a territory — within this definition, sovereignty can then be understood more precisely only through its history. Hinsley writes: At a time when it had become imperative that the conflict between rulers and ruled should be terminated, [Bodin] realized — and it was an impressive intellectual feat — that the conflict would be solved only if it was possible both to establish the existence of a necessarily unrestricted ruling power and to distinguish this power from an absolutism that was free to disregard all laws and regulations.
The Circumscription of the Sovereign State: Theory and Practice The rise and global expansion of sovereignty, described and even lauded by political philosophers, amounts to one of the most formidable and successful political trends in modern times. Bibliography Bartelson, J.
Bodin, J. Brown, Wendy, Elshtain, Jean Bethke, Figgis, J. Fowler, M. Bunck, Grimm, Dieter, and Belinda Cooper, Grotius, H. Walter Dunne, Hinsley, F. Sovereignty , second edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hobbes, T. Leviathan , Harmondsworth: Penguin, Jackson, Robert, James, A. Kallis, Aristotle, Kalmo, Hent, and Quentin Skinner, Kantorowicz, E. Keohane, R. Hoffmann, Keohane and S. Hoffmann eds. Krasner, S. Kratochwil, F.
Luther, M. Machiavelli, N. Maland, David, Europe in the Seventeenth Century , London: Macmillan. Maritain, J. Nexon, Daniel H. Osiander, Andreas, Paris, Roland, Pavel, Carmen, Philpott, D. Pogge, T. Pogge, Thomas, World Poverty and Human Rights , 2nd. Schmitt, Carl, Schwab trans. Spruyt, H. Teschke, Benno, Wilks, Michael, Academic Tools How to cite this entry.
Or, if you are already a subscriber Sign in. Other options. Close drawer menu Financial Times International Edition. Search the FT Search. World Show more World. US Show more US. Companies Show more Companies. Markets Show more Markets.
0コメント