The area of security is the most sensitive area in terms of international cooperation and the UN is widely seen as the only legitimate source of global security. Owing to its legitimacy and the universality of its membership, the UN has been regarded as the most institutionalized arrangement engaged in global security governance (see Diehl and Frederking 2010; Karns and Mingst 2010; Kirchner and Sperling 2007; Rittberger 2001; Thakur 2006; Weiss and Daws 2007; Weiss and Thakur 2010). The end of the Cold War and the rise of an extremely fluid, increasingly interdependent and multicentered world system generated expectations that the UN would emerge as the pivotal actor in global security governance. However, these hopes were short-lived and ephemeral; the UN has turned out to be an inefficient or, at its best, marginally relevant mechanism for coordinating actions needed to manage serious issues and problems of peace and security. Thus, there has emerged a broader debate on the role of the UN and the underlying reasoning of its modus operandi. Our study contributes to this debate, highlighting existing problems encountered by the UN in its operation and discussing the need for a new UN existential logic. We argue that the UN should move more assertively towards a principled multilateralism that will enhance the organization’s prospects. In the first section, we elaborate on the concept of principled multilateralism and discuss its main features.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.