Theoretical Analyzing of the United Nations Reform: UNSC

Abstract

Abstract— After the failure of the ideals of the early 20th century and to deal with their problems, the United Nations was founded on the broken structures of the international community. But despite the UN's success as an international organization compared to its predecessor, it must be recognized that in some respects these hopes were no more than a mirage, and that is reprehensible. Since the beginning of the San Francisco conference, small countries have defied such a big country simply because it violated the spirit of the Charter. Power is divided into offensive and defensive realism. The importance of the concept of collective security lies in the overly institutionalized internalization of monarchical constraints and the transformation of self-protection into a useless biting problem. Security Council reform will require multiple directions at the UN and could involve major changes, including parity representation, veto power, and types of state groupings. The objective of this research is to investigate the five permanent members and other not permanent member state interest groupings developing different positions and proposals on how to forward their issues. Neoclassical Realism will be used as a theoretical framework for this research. This research attempts to highlight John Locke's ideas which defend the principle of majority rule and the separation of legislative and executive powers. This study shows that the opposing countries and organizations try to propose an alternative to the membership of other countries in the Security Council for the permanent member countries.