Why has the UN Charter remained a central plank of international order, even though it was formulated in wartime by only a few of the victorious powers?

Résumé du document

If we had had this Charter a few years ago-and above all, the will to use it- millions, now dead, would be alive. If we should falter in the future in our will to use it, millions, now living, will surely die.' (Truman) This statement delivered by Truman reveals the ambitions of the Charter and the hope its conceivers had of it being respected and applied. Since it was formulated, the Charter has remained a central plank of international order. In this essay, we will try to justify its strength, even though it was formulated in wartime and by only a few of the victorious powers, and will reveal the reasons for its power.

Extraits

[...] The principle of unanimity that the Covenant had was abolished by the UN Charter which was a very important novelty to make decisions advance in the decision making processes. Indeed, although the Covenant of the League of Nations was its intellectual forerunner, the Charter itself displays a much more realistic grasp of the mechanics of world affairs. For example, the allocation of veto powers only to the five permanent members of the Security Council permits some decisions to be made. [...]

[...] With all these minor changes, the UN Charter can hope to still remain a central plank of international order. Moreover the fact that the changes are minor shows how complete and intemporal the Charter is. The reforms we have just cited are the official ones proposed by Kofi Annan but other people say there are other things to change. For example, there is a need to change some things in the Charter as some major powers have tended to deal with each other outside the framework of the UN (US intervention in Iraq not under UN flag). [...]

[...] (2005) The Globalization of World Politics. Third Edition. Oxford University Press. Evans Graham and Newnham Jeffrey. (1998) Dictionary of International Relations. Penguin Reference. Lowe Norman. (1997) Mastering Modern World History. Palgrave. [...]

[...] Secondly, we must define what international order is. It is the combination of major actors, rules, mechanisms and understandings to manage the coexistence and interdependence of states. Now that we have defined these main concepts, we will study the United Nations Charter on the basis of its implication and influence on international order. Why is it (still) a foundation of international order? The United Nations Charter has evolved. And it has done so, even without being rewritten (only amended twice in its lifetime). [...]

[...] It is considered as acting as the conscience of the world even though this is sometimes contested ( people say it is controlled by the United States of America, that there is a total lack of democracy in its organization, that many scandals have dirtied its reputation . ) Anyhow, it embodies the principles of world order, is a main source of international legitimacy, and judges what international behaviour is acceptable. It acts as the Conscience of the world even though it does not quite achieve its full potential. 'The objectives of defined by the Charter of the United Nations are to be considered the best moral goals statesmen can pursue' . [...]