The United Nations is unable to move in times of danger

American analyst Dr. James Holmes asked, in a report published by the American National Interest magazine, whether international law is still valid. He explained that, by reading daily news, it is difficult to escape from the feeling that the law of the jungle, the law of brute force that ruled international affairs from ancient times to the relatively modern ages, has overwhelmed the principle of the inadmissibility of amending international borders by force of arms.

Holmes, the head of the J. bad. Waili »for the marine strategy at the Maritime War College, and a fellow faculty at the Faculty of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia, that the League of Nations, which had been established after the shock of the First World War, sought to sanctify that basic principle in international law, along with the principle of self -determination.

Holmes added that “self -determination is the idea that the people who define themselves as nations have the right to establish their own national countries, and not to force them to live under the rule of strange peoples.”

Despite its lofty aspirations, the League of Nations was never able to mobilize the consensus or power necessary for the struggle for its principles, so the Second World War erupted.

After the defeat of the axis states, the victors established the United Nations, an international organization that is supposed to be more assertive and powerful to impose the principle of “collective security”, which states that the aggression against anyone is an aggression against everyone and requires a common response from everyone.

The United Nations Cold War, especially its Security Council, and the main guarantor of international peace and security within a few years after the start of the activities of the International Authority in San Francisco.

Holmes added that the reason behind this is clear, as any of the five permanent members of the Security Council, China, Russia, France, the United States and Great Britain, can prevent any decision to use force.

Accordingly, the United Nations will always be almost unable to move in times of grave danger.

The exclamation is that there were exceptions to this rule, especially two exceptions, as the administration of US President Harry Truman managed to mobilize a joint counter attack from the United States and the United Nations to repel the North Korean attack on South Korea in 1950, and thwarted armed intervention by China at a later time in that conflict, and this campaign brought back the border between the two Koreas to what it was even though the human price was high.

The United Nations has resumed its fading record in supporting the basic principles. Two of the five permanent members of the Security Council, namely China and Russia, explained their intention to amend the world order that helps its presidency from the apparent point of view.