Diplomatic responses to security threats

Collective security systems are typically associated with the adoption of robust measures to respond to security challenges, in particular the imposition of sanctions and application of military force. However, it is arguably preferable to respond to – and ideally, remove – situations threatening international peace and security via the utilisation of peaceful, diplomatic means. The UN Charter system of collective security recognises as much, obliging member states to prima facie resolve their disputes peacefully while setting out in Chapter VI a series of principles to govern the peaceful settlement of disputes before recourse is had to the provisions of the subsequent enforcement chapter. In practice, Chapters VI and VII operate in tandem rather than in isolation from one another. The effectiveness of modes of pacific settlement within the UN system hinges on various factors, foremost among these being the willingness of parties in dispute to use such mechanisms, the identity and influence of other actors supporting diplomatic initiatives and/or serving as mediators and the pressures brought to bear by major international players. Thus, the outcomes of UN diplomacy vary, yet instances of relative success abound. The Security Council has effectively employed its Chapter VI powers to investigate and make recommendations on situations of concern, resulting in key diplomatic breakthroughs on a number of occasions. However, the figure most closely associated with UN diplomacy has been the Secretary-General. Acting on his own initiative, sometimes through the despatch of special representatives, he has undertaken with some success numerous diplomatic missions as have other actors supporting UN facilitated efforts to promote the pacific settlement of disputes.