Book contents
- The Duty to Secure
- The Duty to Secure
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Glossary
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1 When Is Securitization Morally Required?
- 2 States and the Obligation to Securitize
- 3 Non-state Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
- 4 Sub-systemic Collective State Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
- 5 Systemic Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
- Conclusion
- References
- Index
5 - Systemic Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 February 2024
- The Duty to Secure
- The Duty to Secure
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Glossary
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1 When Is Securitization Morally Required?
- 2 States and the Obligation to Securitize
- 3 Non-state Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
- 4 Sub-systemic Collective State Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
- 5 Systemic Actors and the Obligation to Securitize
- Conclusion
- References
- Index
Summary
This chapter considers the impact of the discovery of mandatory securitization on global security institutions. While ties of community and friendship, specifically at the sub-systemic level, ensure that the burden of mandatory securitization on the international community is relatively small, the international community – in the form of the UNSC – is obligated to act when (1) states or sub-systemic actors fail (note, in other-securitization they may fail for legitimate reasons), or (2) where there is no other designated protector. This chapter suggests that the UN charter amounts to a social contractual situation between the people of the world and the UNSC, rendering its duty to securitize – when conditions are met and there is no other protector – overriding. It goes on to examine the nature of these duties as they already exist by examining RtoP provisions. It shows that even if RtoP was in perfect working order and always acted on, it does not cover the moral duties of the UNSC regarding securitization; notably, it does not cover intent-lacking threats. Much like in Chapter 4 where mandatory securitization is used to update NATO’s Article 5, this chapter shows how mandatory securitization can refocus and thus help RtoP.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Duty to SecureFrom Just to Mandatory Securitization, pp. 176 - 202Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024