* Portions of this paper draw upon the introductory chapter of Keith Krause & W. Andy Knight (Eds.), Changing State/Society Perspectives on the United Nations System (1993).

1 See, e.g., comments by Malaysia, Singapore, Pakistan and Mexico in the General Assembly debate on AN AGENDA FOR PEACE. The original document is the report of the Secretary-General pursuant to the statement adopted by the summit meeting of the Security Council on January 31, 1992. UN Doc. A/47/277, 17 June 1992.

2 Robert Cox, Programme on Multilateralism and the United Nations System (April 1991) (on file at United Nations University, Tokyo).

3 Cox, Robert, Multilateralism and World Order, 18 REV. INT’L STUD. 168 (1992)Google Scholar.

4 Borrowing from Terry Nardin, constitutive principles (such as the rules governing the way pieces move in chess) determine that the game is chess, and not checkers. They cannot be changed without the game changing to something other than chess, although the rules do not determine the outcome of specific games. See Nardin, Terry, International Ethics and International Law, 18, REV. INT’L STUD. 19 (1992)Google Scholar. See also Kratochwil, Friedrich, Rules. Norms and Decisions: On the Conditions Of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 This issue of unrestricted scope came to the fore in the debate over the propriety of the Security Council actions in the Libyan extradition case. See the International Court of Justice decision in “Questions of Interpretation and Application for the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie” (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of America), 14 April 1992, and UN Security Council Resolutions 731 and 748, reprinted in 31 ILM 662 (1992) and 31 ILM 731 (1992).

6 See Turnstaix, Jeremy, The Media Are American 208 (1977)Google Scholar; Schiller, Herbert, Mass Communications and American Empire 34 (1969)Google Scholar.

7 For an overview of the vast literature on change and adaptation of the UN system, see Knight, W. Andy, Change and Reform in the United Nations System, doctoral dissertation on file at York University (1993)Google Scholar.

8 See UNESCO. Many Voices, One World (1980).

9 See Knight, supra note 7, passim. One exception that did speak for far-reaching reform is the USA-UNA report. See Fromuth, Peter (ED.), A Successor Vision: The United Nations of Tomorrow (1988)Google Scholar.

10 Baehr, Peter R. & Gordenker, Leon, The United Nations in the 1990S 162 (1992)Google Scholar.

11 I have in mind here something resembling Fernand Braudel’s distinction between I’histoire événementielle and I’histoire de la tongue durée. For an insightful critique of how international relations has studied change, see Jan Aart Scholte, From Power Politics to Social Change: An Alternative Focus for International Studies, 19 REV. INT’L STUD. 3 (1993).

12 See, for example, John Mearsheimer’s argument in Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War, 15 INT’L SECURITY 5 (1990).

13 The most clear analysis of this type of change is Zacher, Mark, The Decaying Pillars of the Westphalian Temple: Implications for International Order and Governance, in Rosenau, James & Cziempel, Ernst-Otto (EDS.), Governance Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics 58 (1992)Google Scholar.

14 To quote: “One might at first be tempted to consider these two tendencies irreconcilable. … [I]f one looks more carefully, however, one discovers that the two tendencies, towards integration and fragmentation, have a point of contact which cannot be ignored: an indifference to state borders, which translates into a huge crisis for sovereignty.” n.a.: The Illusory Peace 10, (1992).

15 See Alger, Chadwick F., Citizens and the UN System in a Changing World, on file at York Centre for International and Strategic Studies (1992)Google Scholar.

16 See generally Immanuel Kant, Perpetual Peace (Bobbs-Merrill 1984) (1795).

17 A classic presentation from this perspective is: Indar Jit Rikhye, Strengthening Un Peacekeeping: New Challenges and Proposals (1992).

18 An excellent example of this is South Centre, Enhancing the Economic Role of the United Nations 2 (1992), which argues that: “Whether [the United Nations] will be transformed into a mirror image of the existing economic and political power relations, or restructured and strengthened in the original intent of the Charter, is a matter of critical importance.” This is a curious dichotomy.

19 The touchstone for many of these analyses (although it does not discuss the UN system) is the argument in Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (1993).

20 I am indebted to the doctoral work in progress of Pierre Lizée, York University, for insights into the Cambodian situation.

21 Williams, Michael, Peacekeeping and the Politics of Postmodernity, on file at York Centre for International and Strategic Studies (1992)Google Scholar. The insights in this paper spurred my thinking on this topic.

22 One excellent example of such an analysis is Anaya, S. James, Indigenous Rights Norms in Contemporary International Law, 8 Ariz. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 1 (1992)Google Scholar. For a general analysis of the concept of citizenship, see Linklater, Andrew, Men and Citizens in the Theory of International Relations (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Weiss, Thomas G. and Minear, Larry, Do International Ethics Matter? Humanitarian Politics in the Sudan, 25 Ethics and Int’l Aff. 214 (1991)Google Scholar.

24 Id. at 208.

25 See Jackson, Robert H., Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Boutros-Ghali, Boutros, Empowering the United Nations, 71 Foreign Aff. 99 (1992)Google Scholar.

27 Canadian Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Louise Frechette, paraphrased in Meeting New Challenges: Canada’s Response to a New Generation of Peacekeeping, Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs 37 (1993)Google Scholar.

28 Cox, Robert W., Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory, 10 Millennium 136 (1981)Google Scholar.

29 For a provocative analysis of how the institutions themselves exclude or silence certain perspectives (from the standpoint of international law), see Charlesworth, Hilary, Chinkin, Christine & Wright, Shelley, Feminist Approaches to International Law, 85 AJIL 613 (1991)Google Scholar.