The Need for Global Collective Security

The Opinion Page of yesterday's Wall Street Journal contained a piece written by Melanie Kirkpatrick entitled "NATO Goes Global." The article describes the current state of NATO -- the alliance of 26 countries from North America and Europe committed to fulfilling the goals of the North Atlantic Treaty, signed on April 4, 1949. By way of background on NATO, Article V of the Treaty states:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Thus it appears that one of the goals of the formation of NATO was to apply the principle of collective self defense to its European and North American member nations. The first and only time Article V has been invoked was on September 12, 2001.

Returning to Kirkpatrick's Opinion Piece, it details an interesting interview with current NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in which he is quoted as stating:

"If you look at the threats and challenges coming to NATO, these are of a global nature. Terrorism is of a global nature. Weapons of mass destruction proliferation is a global threat. Failed and failing states are happening on a global scale. . . . NATO needs global partners to face those challenges."

Kirkpatrick goes on to detail NATO's role in Afghanistan--its first mission outside of Europe--and the various challenges NATO faces in securing support from its member nations. The underlying theme seems to be that the increasingly global scope of crises of security requires a global security mechanism, and that NATO is not capable of fulfilling this role on its own.

On a related point, a document submitted by Bani Dugal, Principal Representative of the Bahá'í International Community, to the United Nations in April 2005 in response to a report by the Secretary-General of the UN states:

The Bahá'í International Community welcomes the Report’s more comprehensive vision of collective security, based on the understanding that in our interconnected world, a threat to one State is a threat to all. The Bahá'í Faith envisions a system of collective security within a framework of global federation, in which national borders have been conclusively defined and in whose favor all nations of the world will have willingly ceded claims to make war.

Though we remain at a distance from the establishment of the system of collective security operating within the framework of a global federation envisioned by the Bahá'í International Community, it is interesting to observe the growing recognition of the need for such a mechanism and the perception that the original sphere of collective security conceived when NATO was formed--encompassing a handfull of countries in Europe and North America--is insufficient to address the global challenges of this age.