Decisiveness and Accountability as Part of a Principled Response to Nonstate Threats [Excerpt]

Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 20.2 (Summer 2006)

Robert O. Keohane Robert O. Keohane

The central institutions of the United Nations have substantially lost moral authority since the Millennium Summit of 2000. The inability to act on issues involving the use of force, the failure at the 2005 World Summit to agree on a definition of terrorism, the Oil-for-Food scandal, and the perceived cronyism of so many delegations have undermined the moral authority of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Principled responses to international problems are always desirable for ethical reasons. At a time when the legitimacy of international institutions is challenged, they become important also for political reasons. If an international organization loses legitimacy, its effectiveness suffers. Without legitimacy, the best the United Nations could do with respect to threats by nonstate actors, the topic of this roundtable, would be to serve as a channel for concerted state action.

 

To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here

Read More: Ethics, Oil, World Economy, Global Governance, United Nations

blog comments powered by Disqus
In this Issue of the Journal
Join our Mailing Lists
Online Magazine

Online Magazine

Social Network

Social Network

The Journal

The Journal

postprandial-ft