Skip Navigation


Journal of Conflict and Security Law Advance Access originally published online on April 18, 2007
Journal of Conflict and Security Law 2007 12(1):127-138; doi:10.1093/jcsl/krm003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
12/1/127    most recent
krm003v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schrijver, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Conflict & Security Law Copyright © Oxford University Press 2007

Reforming the UN Security Council in Pursuance of Collective Security

Nico Schrijver*

* Professor of Public International Law, Leiden University, The Netherlands

Correspondence: n.j.schrijver{at}law.leidenuniv.nl


  Abstract

In many circles, the most ideal composition of the UN Security Council is a popular subject of discussion, which, by now, could easily be turned into a party game. Such discussions have generated a host of ideas on the most suitable composition of the Council, taking into account geopolitical realities. Notwithstanding all of this, the September 2005 World Summit could only agree to disagree on the issue of Security Council reform as evidenced by the notably vague paragraph requesting the General Assembly to ‘review progress’ on this matter by the end of 2005.1 This article purports to assess the need for, and modalities of, Security Council reform. Obviously, the most appropriate size and composition of the Security Council depends on its tasks. This issue will be addressed in Section 1. The second section highlights the Charter criteria for the composition of the Council, while the third section reviews the various reform proposals. Lastly, Section 4 discusses some alternative ideas and concludes with some final observations.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.