The concept of collective security and its system. About the strategic concept of the CSTO
Without diminishing the importance of all other means of ensuring international security, listed in the previous section, the most important measures should still include the creation of collective security systems on a universal and regional basis.
Accordingly, international law distinguishes two types of collective security systems: universal and regional.
Collective Securityis a system of joint actions of states established by the UN Charter with the aim of maintaining international peace and security, preventing or suppressing acts of aggression.
The first steps towards the practical implementation of the idea of collective security at the interstate level were taken at the I and II Hague Peace Conferences in 1899 and 1907 gg. At these conferences, conventions were adopted on the peaceful resolution of international conflicts and The Permanent Court of Arbitration was established. The conferences were also an attempt to resolve disarmament issues on the basis of multilateral diplomacy.
The first universal model of a collective security system was created after the First World War with the formation of the League of Nations. The legal basis for this system was laid, first of all, in the Statute of the League. Although the Statute Leagues The Nations did not prohibit war as a means of resolving international disputes and disagreements, but it significantly limited the right of states to resort to it.
The Geneva Protocol on the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflicts, adopted within the framework of the League of Nations in 1924, declared aggressive war an international crime, and an attempt was made to define aggression.
But the Protocol did not receive the required number of ratifications and never entered into force.
Next a step in this direction is the adoption of 1928 Treaty of Paris on the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy(Briand-Kellogg Pact). It condemned resorting to war to settle all differences. The parties to the Treaty rejected this in their mutual relations as an instrument of national policy (Article 1). War, according to this document, is permissible only as an instrument of international politics, i.e. in the common interests of states.
A number of other international agreements, adopted taking into account the results of the First World War, significantly expanded the legal basis of the collective security mechanism. These are the London Convention on the Definition of Aggression of 1933, signed by the USSR and 10 neighboring states, the Inter-American Treaty on Non-Aggression and Conciliation of 1933, etc.
But practically the universal system of collective security was created only after World War II with education United Nations as the main instrument for maintaining and strengthening international peace and security based on the joint actions of all member states. The legal mechanism for ensuring security is based on the provisions of the UN Charter, in particular, paragraph 4 of Art. 2: “All members of the United Nations shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force, either against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.” Subsequently, this provision acquired the character of a peremptory norm of general international law.
In other words, in international relations and international law for a long time there was a concept of collective security, which was understood as a system of armed mutual assistance of the states parties to a particular agreement. This understanding of collective security was dictated by the threats of the 20th century: two world wars, a number of regional conflicts, both with and without the use of force.
Over time, in connection with the emergence of new threats to the existence of not only the states themselves, but also all of humanity associated with the emergence of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction, the need to revise the entire range of measures aimed at ensuring universal security became obvious. In the mid-80s. XX century The concept of comprehensive international security is emerging, the idea of developing it belongs to the government of the USSR. The UN Charter did not take into account the dangers associated with the threat of a thermonuclear catastrophe, a general environmental crisis, acute economic problems of developing countries, etc. The concept of comprehensive international security, like this Thus, it became a response to new challenges of the time and proposed measures to improve, first of all, the international legal foundations of the collective security system. It was reflected in the UN General Assembly resolution of December 3, 1986 “General and complete disarmament” (A/RES/41/59). The resolution noted that “genuine and lasting peace can only be established as a result of the effective application of the security system provided for in the UN Charter and the rapid and significant reduction of armaments and armed forces on the basis of international agreements and mutual example.” At the same time, the states expressed their readiness to take new measures for disarmament, including the destruction of nuclear weapons, to strengthen interaction in the political and economic fields, to resolve the problem of overcoming the environmental crisis
Already at the end of the 20th century. it became clear that security of states depends less and less on the amount of accumulated him weapons. In other words, the traditional concept of collective security, which was based on mutual assistance between participants in the collective security system and considered it its main means, is losing relevance.
At the Millennium Summit, Kofi Annan specifically pointed out the changing nature of threats to global peace and security: “The provisions of the Charter are based on the assumption that external aggression directed from one state to another constitutes the most serious threat, but in recent decades many more people have been killed in resulting from civil war, ethnic cleansing and acts of genocide, fueled by weapons that are readily available on the world market weapons" Armed conflicts of a new generation - conflicts on religious and ethnic grounds, occurring, as a rule, within the territory of one state, have long prevailed among all armed clashes on our planet. However, the mechanism for maintaining international peace and security, based on the UN Charter, aims to prevent war in its classical form, i.e. armed clashes between states. In this regard, the need arose to update and improve the UN mechanism.
With the end of the Cold War, all UN member states are busy searching for new means of ensuring international security and strengthening the authority of the UN in this area. The modern concept of peacekeeping within the UN is expressed in the program approved in 1992 by the Security Council, set out in the report of the Secretary-General “An Agenda for Peace” (A/47/277 - S/24111), supplemented in 1995 (A/ 50/60 - S/1995/1), as well as a number of General Assembly resolutions specifying the provisions of the UN Charter (see paragraph 2.3).
Our time is characterized by the emergence of new threats to international peace and security, among which the greatest
poses a danger organized transnational
crime. Criminal communities use the most modern technologies to carry out illegal trade in drugs, weapons and even people around the world. But,
Perhaps the most dangerous type of transnational crime is international terrorism. In resolution 1377
dated 12 November 2001 (S/RES/1377/(2001)) The UN Security Council called acts of international terrorism one of the “most serious threats to international peace and security
in the 21st century."
It is becoming increasingly clear that states need to find ways to harmonize their positions on combating new threats to peace and security within the framework of existing peacekeeping systems and, if necessary, supplement the latter with new mechanisms. The UN remains the center for coordinating such actions. In the Declaration adopted at the Millennium Summit on September 8, 2000, the heads of state and government reaffirmed their “commitment to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, which have proven to be timeless and universal,” and also identified key development goals for the new millennium, including peace , security and disarmament, strengthening the United Nations.
Along with military threats, we should not forget about the threats of a different nature that Kofi Annan mentioned in his report. The security of states is no longer determined solely by their ability to repel an armed attack or aggression, to resist terrorism and organized crime, because the environmental threat and damage may exceed the damage from military operations; rapid population growth, environmental pollution and poverty give rise to economic stagnation, political instability, and sometimes the collapse of states. This once again demonstrates that the modern system of collective security covers the most diverse aspects of relations between states to ensure collective security, confirms the complexity of this concept and, of course, is manifested in the very content of the system.
Principles of international security law.
Sources of international security law.
The main sources of modern international security law include: the UN Charter, as well as the Declaration on Strengthening International Security of 1970 adopted within the UN, the Declaration on the Prevention and Elimination of Disputes and Situations That May Threaten International Peace and Security, and on Enhancing the Role of the United Nations Nations in this area 1988; General Assembly Resolution 14/21 of November 15, 1989 “On strengthening international peace and security and international cooperation in all its aspects in accordance with the UN Charter; Declaration on the Fact-Finding of the United Nations in the Field of the Maintenance of International Peace and Security of December 9, 1991.
The basic principles of international security law are enshrined in the UN Charter of 1945 and the Declaration on Strengthening International Security of 1970:
The principle of refraining in international relations from the threat or use of force, either against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other way incompatible with the purposes of the UN;
The principle of sovereign equality of states;
The principle of non-use of force and threat of force;
The principle of the inviolability of state borders;
The principle of territorial integrity of states;
The principle of peaceful resolution of international disputes;
The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states;
The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations; and also
The principle of centralized use of armed forces in accordance with the UN Charter;
The principle of inevitable responsibility of states for violation of international security law.
In a legal sense, the concept of international security presupposes the creation and functioning of a system of international law and order that would be based on the primacy of international law and a unified approach on the part of the world community to the assessment of actions that violate the peace and security of peoples.
The concept of international security includes 2 aspects: international legal norms in this area and the organizational and legal mechanism for maintaining peace by the world community.
The UN Charter is the main source of international security norms, and the United Nations itself is the most important and only instrument for maintaining international peace and security on the basis of generally recognized principles and norms of international law and the actions of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
The competence of these bodies in matters of ensuring international peace and security of the UN is clearly delineated.
The General Assembly has the right to discuss any questions or matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security, namely:
Consider general principles of cooperation;
The Security Council is responsible for maintaining international peace and security.
The Security Council has the power to take both preventive and enforcement actions on behalf of the UN, including by joint armed forces.
Preventive actions include: comprehensive sanctions of both economic and political nature; establishing an embargo on the supply of weapons and military materials; air embargo; sea and air blockades; interruption of telegraph and postal messages.
Coercive action includes the use of joint UN military forces under the direct authority of the Security Council to restore international peace and security.
The UN Charter establishes that joint armed forces can be used in the event of a threat to the peace, violations of the peace and acts of aggression, in exceptional cases when other measures may be or have already proven insufficient.
The combined armed forces cannot be used for purposes contrary to the Charter.
Security Council actions in the area of peacekeeping begin with the qualification of the situation. Under Article 39 of the UN Charter, it must determine whether it is dealing with a threat to the peace, a breach of the peace or an act of aggression. These qualifications are the legal basis for its further actions to maintain peace.
Depending on the qualifications of the situation, the Security Council, in accordance with Article 40, may resort to temporary measures: a demand for a ceasefire, the withdrawal of troops to previously occupied positions, the withdrawal of troops from the occupied territory, or the establishment of a temporary demarcation line. Creation of a demilitarized zone, etc.
If the situation continues to deteriorate, the Council has the right to take both non-armed and military measures.
Measures not related to the use of armed force are provided for in Article 41 and include: complete or partial interruption of economic relations, railway, sea, air, postal, telegraph, radio or other means of communication, as well as severance of diplomatic relations.
The application of measures using armed forces is determined by Article 42, according to which the Security Council is authorized to take action by air, sea or land forces if it considers that the measures provided for in Art. 41 may prove to be insufficient or have already proven to be insufficient. Thus, the Security Council can take action to use armed forces both after implementing measures under Art. 41, simultaneously with them, and as a primary measure.
Article 43 of the UN Charter defines the following procedure for UN members to place at the disposal of the Security Council the necessary armed forces, assistance, and facilities:
1. The Security Council decides to place at its disposal armed forces from UN members.
2. Based on this requirement, the Security Council concludes a special agreement or agreements with UN member states, with their subsequent ratification.
3. In accordance with Article 47, the Security Council must decide all questions related to the creation and use of armed forces, relying on the assistance and advice of the Military Staff Committee, consisting of the chiefs of staff of the permanent members of the Council or their representatives.
SIST E MA "COLLECT AND VNOY SAFETY A SSNOSTI"
"Collective security" system- a state of international relations in which the joint efforts of states exclude the violation of universal peace on a global or regional scale. In the 1930s, the USSR and France sought to create such a system, aimed at deterring aggression, primarily German. The main ideologists of “collective security” in the interwar period were the Prime Minister of France L. Barthou and the People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR M. M. Litvinov.
The path to the idea of “collective security”
The Japanese attack on Manchuria in 1931 and especially the Nazis' rise to power in Germany in 1933 forced the USSR to rethink its previous foreign policy guidelines. The new German leadership openly declared its negative attitude towards Soviet ideology and did not abandon the goal formulated by Hitler to win “living space in the East” for Germany. This created a potential danger for the USSR. From supporting the revision of the Versailles order, Soviet foreign policy moved to a position of defending the foundations of the post-war status quo. At the 17th Party Congress, Stalin said that “things are heading towards a new imperialist war.” He named several possible scenarios for the start of the conflict and expressed the opinion that any of these scenarios would be disastrous for its organizers. Regarding Germany, Stalin noted that the USSR's suspicion of the new authorities of this country was due not so much to the essence of fascist ideology as to Hitler's aggressive plans. N.I. Bukharin took a tougher position: after reading several excerpts from Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” and other works by Nazi and Japanese authors, the editor-in-chief of Pravda said: “This is who stands before us, and this is who we will have to deal with, comrades, to deal with all those enormous historical battles that history has placed on our shoulders.”
Back in June 1933, the USSR informed Germany that it would cease military cooperation between the countries in September. After this, Moscow entered into consultations with the French side on concluding a mutual assistance agreement. On December 29, 1933, speaking at the IV session of the USSR Central Executive Committee, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs M. M. Litvinov outlined a “new course” of Soviet foreign policy for the coming years. It was assumed that the USSR would, firstly, adhere to the principle of non-aggression and maintain neutrality in any conflict; secondly, to pursue a policy of appeasement towards Germany and Japan; thirdly, to participate in the creation of a collective security system; fourthly, behave openly in dialogue with Western democracies. Over the course of two years, the “new course” brought a number of successes to Soviet diplomacy: Back in November 1933, the USSR was recognized by the United States, which was facilitated by Litvinov’s visit to Washington and his negotiations with President F. Roosevelt, and in the summer of 1934 by Romania, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria. In September of the same year, the Soviet Union joined the League of Nations and was immediately accepted as a permanent member of the League Council as a great power.
“Collective Security”: Achievements and Costs
Taking into account that on January 26, 1934, Germany concluded a non-aggression pact with Poland, Moscow set its sights on a more intensive rapprochement with France. The Soviet leadership supported the proposals of the French Minister of Foreign Affairs L. Barthou. The first of these was that all states of Eastern and Central Europe, including Germany and the USSR, must sign an agreement obliging them to provide mutual assistance to whichever of them becomes a victim of aggression. This agreement, the so-called “Eastern Pact,” was supposed to become an analogue of the Locarno agreements for Western Europe. The second proposal stipulated that France and the USSR would sign a bilateral treaty on mutual assistance in the event of military aggression in Europe and thus link two collective security systems, Eastern and Western European (Locarno). The French and Soviet sides began jointly developing a draft Eastern Pact, but Germany immediately flatly refused to sign such an agreement, and Poland also declared its reluctance to do so. On October 9, 1934, in Marseille, L. Barthou was killed along with King Alexander I of Yugoslavia by Croatian terrorists. The new head of the French Foreign Ministry, P. Laval, did not return to the draft Eastern Pact, but he supported the idea of a Soviet-French treaty. After Germany, violating one of the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles, restored compulsory military service, the USSR and France signed a bilateral treaty on mutual assistance in the event of a military attack in Europe. This happened on May 2, 1935, and two weeks later the USSR signed a similar pact with Czechoslovakia. At the same time, the Soviet-British rapprochement proceeded, the apogee of which was the visit to Moscow of British Foreign Secretary Eden Eden in March 1935.
On October 3, 1935, Italian troops invaded Ethiopia and the Italo-Ethiopian War began. Soviet diplomats in the League of Nations advocated applying sanctions against the aggressor, including an oil embargo, which Mussolini feared. However, due to the indecision of France and Great Britain, it was not possible to put pressure on Italy.
On February 28, 1936 - nine months after signing - the Soviet-French mutual assistance treaty was ratified. Hitler used this as a pretext to remilitarize the Rhineland. On March 7, 1936, declaring that France had responded to Germany’s assurances of friendship with an alliance with the Soviet Union “opening the gates of Europe to Bolshevism,” he ordered the deployment of troops into the Rhineland. Thus, the German authorities violated the Treaty of Versailles and the Locarno Agreements. Moscow responded to Hitler's step by declaring its readiness to take, together with France and Great Britain, within the framework of the League of Nations, all necessary measures to ensure compliance with existing treaties. As for the great powers of the West, they avoided active action, not wanting to bind themselves to obligations with the USSR.
In July 1936, the Spanish Civil War began. Italy and Germany supported the rebels who opposed the legitimate republican government in Madrid. Over time, Italo-German assistance to Franco became more and more significant. Even though the establishment of Franco's regime in Spain posed a greater threat to London and Paris than to Moscow, France and Great Britain offered international commitments to non-intervention. The USSR was forced to join, although at the very beginning of the war in Spain it made it clear that it was on the side of the legitimate government. Despite the fact that Germany and Italy formally joined the obligations, they continued to support the rebels. Taking this into account, in the fall of 1936, Moscow decided to independently provide assistance to the republican government: send weapons, send instructors, as well as volunteers from whom international brigades were formed.
In October 1936, Germany and Italy entered into an agreement on military-political cooperation, creating the so-called Berlin-Rome Axis. On November 25, 1936, in Berlin, Germany and Japan signed the Anti-Comintern Pact. A year later, Italy joined him. As a result, a bloc was formed, which, under the slogans of the fight against communism, began active preparations for war. In March 1938, Germany carried out the “Anschluss” of Austria - the territory of the republic became part of its northern neighbor. The French and British governments limited themselves to formally condemning the Anschluss. The USSR called for collective resistance to aggression, but its proposal did not meet with support.
The Munich Agreement and the collapse of the “collective security” policy
The Western powers, counting on the fact that Hitler would limit his expansionist plans to the east, headed for a policy of concessions to Nazi Germany. In September 1938, Hitler demanded that the Czechoslovak authorities transfer to Germany the Sudetenland, where the Germans made up the majority of the population. Prague was ready to defend itself, but France abandoned its allied obligations and, together with Great Britain, convinced the Czechoslovak government to cede the Sudetenland. The Soviet side invited the Western powers to jointly defend Czechoslovakia, but those who were not interested in the fall of the National Socialist regime in Germany refused. Czechoslovakia also refused assistance from the USSR, whose authorities feared that this would create conditions for Soviet intervention. On the night of September 29-30, 1938, at a conference of heads of government and foreign ministers of four states in Munich, an agreement was signed, which in Soviet historiography was commonly called the “Munich Agreement.” According to his terms, the Sudetenland became part of Germany. Representatives of the USSR were not invited to Munich, and the Soviet Union itself turned out to be the only state that refused to recognize the consequences of the agreement reached in Munich. The example of Germany freed the hands of the Italian dictator B. Mussolini: in April 1939, Italian troops occupied Albania.
The Munich Agreement showed that the Western powers were not ready to cooperate with the USSR within the framework of a collective security system, and this forced the Soviet leadership to reconsider the principles of the country's foreign policy. Moscow has set a course for neutrality in the event of a conflict between capitalist powers, counting on benefiting from a future war. In April 1939, in the face of a growing military threat, the USSR began negotiations with Great Britain and France on mutual obligations to provide assistance in the event of aggression against any of the three countries in Europe, but attempts to reach an agreement reached a dead end. Britain, meanwhile, was secretly negotiating with Germany to direct Hitler's aggression against the USSR. In August 1939, the Soviet side invited the same states to sign a military convention providing for joint actions by the armed forces of the three powers in the event of German aggression. It was assumed that the USSR would have the opportunity to conduct troops through the territory of Poland in order to reach the German border. Warsaw, which by that time already had guarantees from France and Great Britain for protection in the event of a German attack, categorically refused, and the French and British governments did not try to convince it otherwise. Negotiations failed again, and this thwarted the last attempt to create a united anti-Hitler front in Europe.
In an effort to prevent a real threat of war, the Soviet government entered into a dialogue with Germany. Negotiations began on August 15, 1939, and already on August 23, the parties signed a Non-Aggression Pact in Moscow for a period of ten years, and at the same time an additional secret protocol, which stipulated the delimitation of the spheres of interests of both states in Eastern Europe. On the German side, the documents were signed by the head of the country's Foreign Ministry, I. Ribbentrop; on the Soviet side, by his colleague V. M. Molotov. Back in May 1939, he replaced the main ideologist of the policy of collective security in Europe, M. M. Litvinov, as People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR. The conclusion of the Soviet-German non-aggression treaty put an end to the USSR's plans to create a system of collective security in Europe.
Historical sources
Kollontai A.M. From my life and work. M., 1974.
Litvinov M. Against aggression. M., 1938.
Maisky I.M. Memoirs of a Soviet diplomat. M., 1971.
COLLECTIVE SECURITY COUNCIL
About the Concept of Collective Security of the Participating States
SOLUTION
about the Concept of Collective Security
states parties to the Collective Security Treaty
Collective Security Council
1. Approve the Concept of Collective Security of the states parties to the Collective Security Treaty (attached).
2. Consider at a session of the Collective Security Council the draft Implementation Plan for the Concept of Collective Security.
In order to develop a draft Plan, create a temporary working group of representatives of the participating states under the Secretary General of the Collective Security Council.
Done in the city of Almaty on February 10, 1995 in one original copy in Russian. The original copy is stored in the Archives of the Government of the Republic of Belarus, which will send a certified copy to each state that signed this Decision.
For the Republic of Armenia
L. Ter-Petrosyan
For the Republic of Belarus
A. Lukashenko
For the Republic of Georgia
E. Shevardnadze
For the Republic of Kazakhstan
N. Nazarbayev
For the Kyrgyz Republic
A.Akaev
For the Russian Federation
B. Yeltsin
For the Republic of Tajikistan
E. Rakhmonov
For the Republic of Uzbekistan
I. Karimov
* The decision was signed by the Republic of Belarus with the note: “See comments” (published on page 51).
** The decision was not signed by the Republic of Azerbaijan.
Application. The concept of collective security of the states parties to the Collective Security Treaty
Application
to the decision of the collective council
security about the concept of collective
security of participating states
Collective Security Treaty
dated February 10, 1995
COLLECTIVE SECURITY CONCEPT
STATES PARTICIPANTS TO THE TREATY
ABOUT COLLECTIVE SECURITY
The concept of collective security of the states parties to the Collective Security Treaty of May 15, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the Concept) is a set of views of the states parties to the Collective Security Treaty (hereinafter referred to as the participating states) on preventing and eliminating threats to peace, joint defense against aggression, ensuring their sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The concept is based on the principles of the UN, OSCE, Collective Security Treaty, as well as the provisions of other documents adopted by the participating states in its development.
The concept includes: the fundamentals of the military policy of the participating states, the fundamentals of ensuring collective security, the main directions and stages of creating a collective security system.
The implementation of the provisions of the Concept provides for the implementation of coordinated political, economic, military and other measures.
In political and military relations, the participating states do not consider any state or coalition of states their enemy; they see all states of the world community as equal partners.
1. Fundamentals of the military policy of the participating states
The participating states are united by military-political and economic interests, the existing military-technical base and infrastructure, and the desire to pursue a coordinated policy to ensure collective security.
The participating states will hold consultations in order to coordinate positions and pursue an agreed security policy:
in relation to other CIS member states - on issues of military cooperation and provision of mutual assistance in solving problems of military development;
in relation to NATO and other military-political organizations - on issues of cooperation and partnership, participation in existing and created new regional security structures.
The participating states ensure collective security with all the capabilities at their disposal, with priority given to peaceful means. When developing measures to ensure collective security, they take into account the following.
The end of the global confrontation between East and West has significantly reduced the risk of a world war.
At the same time, there is a significant number of regional interstate and intrastate problems, the aggravation of which is fraught with escalation into armed conflicts and local wars. The prerequisites for this remain in social, political, economic, territorial, national-ethnic, religious and other contradictions, as well as in the commitment of a number of states to resolve them by force.
The participating states consider the main sources of military danger to be:
territorial claims of other countries to participating states;
existing and potential hotbeds of local wars and armed conflicts, primarily in the immediate vicinity of the borders of the participating states;
the possibility of using (including unauthorized) nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction in service with a number of states;
the proliferation of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction, their means of delivery and the latest military production technologies, combined with attempts by individual countries, organizations and terrorist groups to realize their political and military aspirations;
the possibility of undermining the stability of the strategic situation as a result of violation of international agreements in the field of limitation and reduction of armed forces and weapons, unjustified buildup of military power by other states and military-political alliances;
attempts to interfere from the outside in the internal affairs of the participating states, to destabilize their internal political situation;
international terrorism, the policy of blackmail.
The participating states consider the following as factors that could lead to the escalation of a military danger into a direct military threat:
building up groupings of troops (forces) in regions adjacent to the external borders of the participating states to the extent that violates the existing balance of forces;
creation and training on the territory of other states of armed formations intended for use against participating states;
unleashing border conflicts and armed provocations from the territory of neighboring states;
the introduction of foreign troops into territories adjacent to the participating states (unless this is related to measures to restore and maintain peace in accordance with a decision of the UN Security Council or the OSCE).
The participating states consider the following priority areas in joint activities to prevent a military threat:
participation together with other states and international organizations in the creation of collective security systems in Europe and Asia;
coordination of actions to implement existing and develop new international agreements on disarmament and arms control;
expansion of confidence-building measures in the military field;
establishment and development of equal partnerships with NATO, other military-political organizations and regional security structures aimed at effectively solving problems of strengthening peace;
intensifying dialogue on the preparation and adoption of effective international agreements in the field of reduction of naval forces and weapons, as well as restrictions on naval activities;
conducting peacekeeping operations by decision of the UN Security Council, OSCE, in accordance with international obligations;
coordination of efforts to protect the external borders of participating states;
maintaining the armed forces and other troops of the participating states at a level that ensures defense sufficiency.
II. Fundamentals of collective security
The goal of the participating states in ensuring collective security is the prevention of wars and armed conflicts, and in the event of their outbreak, the guaranteed protection of the interests, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the participating states.
In peacetime, this goal is achieved by resolving controversial problems, international and regional crises exclusively through political, conciliatory means, maintaining the defense potential of each state, taking into account both national and collective interests.
Each participating State shall take appropriate measures to ensure a stable situation on its borders. On the basis of mutual agreement, they coordinate the activities of border troops and other competent services to maintain the established regime in the border zones of the participating states.
If a threat to the security, territorial integrity and sovereignty of one or more participating states or a threat to international peace arises, the participating states immediately activate the mechanism of joint consultations in order to coordinate their positions and take specific measures to eliminate the emerging threat.
The strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation perform the function of deterring possible attempts to implement aggressive intentions against participating states in accordance with the military doctrine of the Russian Federation.
In the event of aggression, the participating states, in accordance with Article 4 of the Collective Security Treaty, reflect it and take measures to force the aggressor to cease hostilities. To achieve this, they determine and plan in advance the content, forms and methods of joint actions.
The collective security of participating states is based on the following basic principles:
indivisibility of security: aggression against one participating state is considered an aggression against all participating states;
equal responsibility of participating states for ensuring security;
respect for territorial integrity, respect for sovereignty, non-interference in internal affairs and consideration of each other's interests;
collectivity of defense created on a regional basis;
making decisions on fundamental issues of ensuring collective security based on consensus;
compliance of the composition and readiness of forces and assets with the scale of the military threat.
III. Collective security system.
The main directions of its creation
The basis of collective security is the collective security system, which the participating states consider as a set of interstate and state governing bodies, forces and means that ensure, on a general legal basis (taking into account national legislation), the protection of their interests, sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The interstate bodies of the collective security system are:
The Collective Security Council is the highest political body at the interstate level, ensuring coordination and joint activities of the participating states aimed at implementing the Collective Security Treaty;
The Council of Foreign Ministers is the highest advisory body of the Collective Security Council on issues of coordinating the domestic and foreign policies of the participating states;
The Council of Defense Ministers is the highest advisory body of the Collective Security Council on issues of military policy and military development of the participating states.
To solve specific problems of ensuring collective security, other management bodies may be created, operating on a permanent or temporary basis.
The state bodies of the collective security system are the political and military leadership of the participating states.
The participating states consider the following as forces and means of the collective security system:
armed forces and other troops of participating states;
coalition (joint) groups of troops (forces) in the regions that will be created to repel aggression against the participating states;
joint (joint) air defense system, other systems.
The creation of forces and means of a collective security system is aimed at deterring a possible aggressor, timely detecting preparations for possible aggression and repelling it, ensuring the protection of the borders of participating states, and participating in peacekeeping operations.
The Collective Security Council may create collective peacekeeping forces for peacekeeping operations carried out in accordance with the decision of the UN Security Council and the OSCE.
The participating states consider the following as the main directions for creating a collective security system:
convergence of the main provisions of the legislative acts of the participating states in the field of defense and security;
holding regular consultations on problems of military development and training of the armed forces of the participating states;
development of common approaches to the issues of bringing troops (forces) to the highest levels of combat readiness, forms and methods of their training, operational and combat use, as well as coordinated mobilization preparation of the economies of the participating states;
achieving multilateral agreements on the use of elements of military infrastructure, air and water space of the participating states;
coordination of issues of operational equipment of the territories of the participating states in the interests of collective defense;
carrying out joint activities for operational and combat training of the armed forces and other troops of the participating states;
coordination of training programs for military personnel and specialists;
coordination of plans for the development, production, supply and repair of weapons and military equipment;
development of uniform approaches to the standards for creating and maintaining inventories of material assets.
The formation of a collective security system is carried out consistently (in stages), taking into account the development of the military-political situation in the world.
At the first stage:
substantially complete the creation of the armed forces of the participating states;
develop a program of military and military-technical cooperation between the participating states and begin its implementation;
develop and adopt legal acts regulating the functioning of the collective security system.
At the second stage:
create coalition (joint) groupings of troops (forces) to repel possible aggression and plan their use;
create a joint (joint) air defense system;
consider the issue of creating united armed forces.
At the third stage, complete the creation of a collective security system for the participating states.
The participating states in their activities to ensure collective security will comply with the UN Charter, generally accepted international legal norms and principles.
This Concept of Collective Security reinforces the commitment of the participating states to the goals of preventing wars and armed conflicts, eliminating them from the system of international relations, creating conditions for the comprehensive development of individuals, societies and states based on the ideals of humanism, democracy and universal security.
The provisions of the Concept will be supplemented, clarified and improved with the further development and strengthening of cooperation between the participating states and the formation of a new system of international relations.
NOTES AND SUGGESTIONS
to the Decision on the Concept of Collective Security
states parties to the Collective Security Treaty
Republic of Belarus
Section II. Fundamentals of collective security
1. In paragraph 1, after the words “participating states,” add “on the basis of bilateral agreements.”
2. In paragraph 4, delete the words “or threats to international peace” (this goes beyond the scope of the Collective Security Treaty).
The text of the document is verified according to:
"Commonwealth"
(CIS Information Bulletin) No. 1,
Minsk, 1995
Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Report
The concept of universal collective security
international agreement security collective
In the second half of the 20th century. international security has become universal. This is explained by a number of facts:
1) the world has become truly interconnected;
2) an increasing number of problems have become global;
3) the qualitative characteristics of modern weapons require the efforts of members of the international community to maintain peace.
Based on the understanding of the universal nature of security, measures aimed at ensuring a stable and non-violent peace must be comprehensive. They should concern various areas of interaction between states - political, military, socio-economic, environmental, humanitarian. Recently, there has been more and more talk about the environmental and humanitarian aspects of global security. Indeed, it is now impossible to ensure global security without environmental security and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. At the same time, the basis of the system of universal security is collective security. This term is usually understood as a set of measures by members of the international community or a particular region, carried out by them in order to prevent and eliminate a threat to peace or to enforce peace in the event of an act of aggression or other violations in accordance with international law.
The concept of collective security is based on the fact that the world in modern conditions of development of international relations is indivisible, that is, the security of any state is directly related to the security of the entire international community. This means that any violation of peace, including local ones, threatens global peace and security.
The concept of collective security includes the following elements:
1) a system of generally recognized principles and norms of international law enshrined in the UN Charter, the most important of which are the equality of states; respect for sovereignty; prohibition of the use of force or threat of force; resolution of international disputes exclusively by peaceful means; non-interference in the internal affairs of states, etc.;
2) a system for peaceful resolution of disputes;
3) a system of collective measures to prevent and eliminate threats to peace, violations of peace and acts of aggression;
4) a system of collective disarmament measures.
Collective security is based on the requirement for the states of the world:
React to any act of violation of peace and security in any region of the Earth;
Cooperate with each other in maintaining and strengthening international peace and security;
Provide all possible assistance, including with armed forces, to the victim of aggression and refrain from providing assistance to the aggressor state;
Participate in joint actions provided for by the UN Charter in order to prevent or eliminate threats to peace, violations of peace and aggression.
There are two types of collective security systems: universal and regional. The universal system of collective security is based on the provisions of the Charter and includes:
Means of peaceful resolution of disputes (Chapter 1), joint actions (preventive and coercive) in the event of an act of aggression (Chapter VII) and disarmament measures (Articles 11, 26, 47). As already noted, in accordance with the UN Charter, the main responsibility for maintaining international peace and security within the framework of universal systems of collective security is assigned to the Security Council. This is the only body of the UN system competent to make decisions on the use of preventive and coercive actions up to the creation of multinational armed forces.
Paragraph 1 of the UN General Assembly resolution “on a comprehensive system of international security of 1986” emphasizes that “the system of collective security embodied in the Charter of the United Nations continues to be a fundamental and indispensable instrument for the preservation of international peace and security.”
General provisions on the regional security system are contained in Chapter VIII (Articles 52 - 54) of the UN Charter. the means for organizations to maintain peace and security in the region are to resolve such issues relating to the maintenance of peace and security as may be appropriate for regional action, the joint purposes and principles of the United Nations; peaceful resolution of local disputes before referring these disputes to the UN Security Council (Article 52, paragraph 2) and, where appropriate, the use of enforcement actions under the leadership of the Security Council on the basis of powers from it (Article 53, paragraph 1).
More detailed provisions concerning regional security systems are contained in the constituent acts of regional organizations that provide for collective security measures. Such organizations, in particular, are: LAS, OAS, OAU, NATO. The North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 contains certain discrepancies with the provisions of Art. 53 of the UN Charter. Therefore, in the process of revising the role of NATO, due to the peculiarities of modern international relations, this treaty should be brought into conformity with the UN Charter.
The founding document of the OSCE, the Helsinki Final Act of August 1, 1975, laid the foundation for the creation of a pan-European system of security and cooperation. The main links of collective security within the OSCE are:
a) compliance with the provisions of the Declaration of Principles of the Helsinki Final Act, including those relating to the territorial integrity of Member States, the inviolability of their borders and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms;
b) diverse cooperation in political, socio-economic, scientific, technical, humanitarian and other spheres;
c) a set of measures to reduce the level of armaments and strengthen confidence among member states;
d) mechanisms for peaceful resolution of disputes;
e) organizational measures to monitor the implementation of the provisions of OSCE documents, carried out at the unilateral, bilateral and multilateral levels. An example of the latter are the meetings of the states participating in the Helsinki Process in Belgrade (1977-1978), Madrid (1980-1982), Vienna (1986-1989), Paris (1990), the Stockholm Conference on Strengthening Measures trust, security and disarmament 1986, etc.
On November 21, 1990, the Charter for a New Europe was adopted in Paris, which stated that “the era of confrontation and division of Europe has come to an end.” The right to equal security for everyone and the freedom to choose to ensure one’s own security were reaffirmed.
In 1992, in Helsinki, the CSCE participating states adopted the document “The Challenge of a Time of Change,” which states that the CSCE is a regional agreement consistent with the provisions of Chapter VIII of the UN Charter. This document pays much attention to issues of collective regional security: prevention and peaceful resolution of disputes, CSCE peacekeeping operations, etc. In accordance with the Helsinki Document of 1992, the Forum for Security Co-operation (FSC) was established, whose competence includes: holding negotiations on arms control, disarmament, confidence- and security-building measures; organizing regular consultations and intensive cooperation in the security field; helping to limit the risk of conflict.
On December 15, 1992, the Agreement on Arbitration and Magistrate Proceedings within the CSCE was signed. The OSCE Commission for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes is also called upon to deal with the problem of peaceful resolution of disputes.
At the meeting of heads of state and government of the OSCE participating States in Lisbon in December 1996, a declaration was adopted on the model of a common, comprehensive, secure Europe of the 21st century (Lisbon Declaration), which notes that “the OSCE plays a central role in achieving the further goal of a common security space "(clause 4). This document also notes the need to develop a European security that can meet the needs of the peoples of Europe in the new century.
Thus, a multi-level system for maintaining peace and security has been created within the OSCE. The task is to ensure the smooth and efficient operation of its components.
The CIS Charter, in contrast to the Agreement on the creation of the CIS, contains Section III, dedicated to collective security and military-political cooperation of member states (Articles 11-15). So, in Art. 11 states: "Member states enter into coherent policies on international security, disarmament and arms control, and the representation of armed forces and maintain security in the Commonwealth, including through military monitoring collective peacekeeping forces." The CIS Charter provides for a mechanism for mutual consultations with a threat to the sovereignty of any member state, the use of peacekeeping operations or collective armed forces in accordance with Art. 51 of the UN Charter. Specific issues of military-political cooperation between the CIS member states are regulated by special agreements. The effectiveness of mechanisms to ensure collective security within the CIS is low.
The main instrument for maintaining peace and preventing the outbreak of war is the universal system of collective security provided for by the UN Charter. The Charter establishes the foundations of the modern world legal order, the principles of relations between states in the international arena and provides for a whole range of measures to preserve international peace and suppress acts of aggression. Among them:
Means of peaceful resolution of international disputes; measures to ensure peace using regional security organizations;
Enforcement measures against violating states without the use of armed forces;
Coercive measures against aggressor states using armed forces.
One of the most important elements of the universal system of collective security is the peaceful resolution of international disputes, which is determined by Chapter. VI UN Charter “Peaceful Settlement of Disputes”. In accordance with this chapter of the UN Charter, parties to any dispute, the continuation of which might threaten the maintenance of international peace and security, shall first endeavor to resolve the dispute through negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial proceedings, recourse to regional authorities or agreements or other peaceful means of their choice. The UN Security Council, when it considers it necessary, requires the parties to resolve their dispute through such means. It is authorized to investigate any dispute or any situation which may give rise to international friction or give rise to a dispute, to determine whether the continuation of that dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security.
In addition, any UN member can bring any dispute to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly. A State which is not a Member of the Organization may also bring to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly any dispute to which it is a party if it undertakes in advance with respect to that dispute an obligation for the peaceful settlement of disputes.
In accordance with the UN Charter, measures can be taken to ensure international peace using regional security organizations. In accordance with Art. 53 of the Charter, the UN Security Council uses, where appropriate, such regional agreements or bodies for enforcement action under its authority. However, regional organizations cannot take any coercive action without authority from the Security Council, with the exception of measures related to repelling an armed attack on one of the states participating in the regional collective security system.
An important element of the general system of collective security is also actions regarding threats to peace, violations of peace and acts of aggression, provided for in Chapter. VII of the UN Charter.
Thus, the Security Council determines the existence of any threat to the peace, any breach of the peace or act of aggression and makes recommendations or decides what measures should be taken to maintain or restore international peace and security. To prevent the situation from worsening, the Security Council is authorized, before making recommendations or deciding to take action, to require the parties concerned to implement such temporary measures as it finds necessary or desirable. Such temporary measures must not prejudice the rights, claims or position of the parties concerned. The Security Council takes due account of the failure to comply with these temporary measures.
The Security Council has the power to decide what measures, other than the use of military force, should be used to implement its decisions, and it can require Members to apply these measures. These measures may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations, rail, sea, air, postal, telegraph, radio or other means of communication, as well as severance of diplomatic relations.
If the Security Council considers that the said measures may be insufficient or have already proven insufficient, it is authorized to take such action by air, sea or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such actions may include demonstrations, blockades and other operations by air, sea or ground forces of Members of the Organization. All Members of the Organization, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to place at the disposal of the Security Council, upon its request and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, the armed forces, assistance and related facilities necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security. , including the right of way. Such agreement or agreements shall determine the number and type of troops, their degree of readiness and their general disposition, and the nature of the facilities and assistance to be provided.
Plans for the use of armed forces are drawn up by the Security Council with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee, which is created to advise and assist the Security Council on all matters relating to the military requirements of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security, to the use of troops provided at his disposal, and to the command of them, as well as to the regulation of weapons and to possible disarmament. The Military Staff Committee consists of the chiefs of staff of the permanent members of the Security Council or their representatives. Any Member of the Organization not permanently represented on the Committee shall be invited by the Committee to cooperate with it if the effective performance of the duties of the Committee requires the participation of that Member in the work of the Committee. The Military Staff Committee, subordinate to the Security Council, is responsible for the strategic direction of any armed forces placed at the disposal of the Security Council. Issues relating to the command of such forces will have to be worked out later.
The UN Charter does not affect the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs on a Member of the Organization until the Security Council takes measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members of the Organization in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately communicated to the Security Council and shall in no way affect the power and responsibility of the Security Council, in accordance with this Charter, to take at any time such action as it considers necessary. mi to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Posted on Allbest.ru
...Similar documents
History of the formation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). Methods and structure of the organization. The current situation of the CSTO and prospects for the future. The concept of collective security and its concept. Conflicts and their resolution by the CSTO.
course work, added 06/02/2009
Analysis of the role of the United Nations (UN) Security Council in ensuring a system of collective security. The UN and the resolution of international crises and conflicts. The role of the UN Security Council in resolving the war in Iraq (2003-2011).
thesis, added 07/21/2014
The concept and properties of international security law, its normative and legislative basis, its significance for fruitful international cooperation at the present stage. Characteristics and analysis of the main sources of international security.
test, added 06/12/2010
Forms of participation of international organizations in the law-making process. Law of international treaties, system and sources. International cooperation in the fight against crime. Collective security system. Diplomatic privileges and immunities.
test, added 05/05/2015
Defining the structure and role of the United Nations Security Council, assigning its primary responsibility for maintaining peace and collective security. Study of modern international conflicts and ways to resolve them.
course work, added 02/28/2015
Rules of law in international communication. International legal support for peace and security as a set of regulated international legal measures. Specifics of the collective security system. International legal regulation of the extradition procedure.
test, added 02/09/2010
Guarantees of the security of each individual state lie through the comprehensive strengthening of general security. Participation of Russian police forces in peacekeeping operations. Conciliatory (political) means of resolving international disputes. UN Charter.
lecture, added 07/13/2008
The place of information security in the security architecture of the modern world. Legally formalized unions of states concluded to repel a common geopolitical threat. Implementation of collective security at the universal level within the UN.
course work, added 11/12/2013
Prerequisites for creating a unified system for ensuring security in Europe. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. State expenditures on security. OSCE and prospects for further development of the collective security system in Europe.
course work, added 08/29/2015
The history of the creation of the United Nations Security Council, its position at the present stage of development. UN bodies as the main mechanism for achieving and maintaining international stability and peace. Main problems of development of the Security Council.
- Submission of electronic reporting to the tax office via the Internet
- Exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register for false information: grounds, appeal of the decision of the Federal Tax Service on the upcoming exclusion
- What is an inn? By contacting the authorized body, you can find out
- Application for deregistration of UTII IP UTII deregistration grounds