| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Regionalism v. Universalism
Christoph Schreuer 1
Full text available: PDF format *
I. Introduction
The debate surrounding regionalism and universalism in international organizations reflects the old dilemma between centralism and local governance at the domestic level. Local modes of problem solving are often seen to be more efficient, to be based on a better understanding of the specific circumstances and to be better placed to take account of local peculiarities, cultural or otherwise. Centralist solutions carry the expectation of a more homogeneous, effective and uniform method of government. Within Nation States the compromise between the two opposing principles has found its expression in various models of federalism. The diversity and ongoing evolution of domestic solutions for the allocation of functions between central and local decision-makers is a clear sign that there is no simple answer to this basic antithesis.
The advent of international organizations with global pretensions has transposed the old dilemma to the international level and has added some new dimensions.2 The universal arena is often seen as being too weak and incoherent for effective action. This has led to calls for a shift to regional institutions. Conversely, regionalism is said to carry the danger of fragmentation to the international system. Moreover, regional superpowers tend to distort or even abuse regional processes prompting calls for the involvement of a global mechanism with more `democratic' or egalitarian structures.
Both the Covenant of the League of Nations and the Charter of the United Nations display a clear preponderance of universalist features. The Covenant's reference in Article 21 to `regional understandings like the Monroe Doctrine' was little more than a futile attempt to secure United States participation. The League never obtained universal acceptance due to its limited membership, mostly of European and American States, a phenomenon which was exacerbated by a considerable number of defections.
In the negotiations surrounding the drafting of the United Nations Charter, the struggle between universalist and regionalist sentiments played a prominent role.3 The Dumbarton Oaks proposals were strongly dominated by a universalist approach. At San Francisco important modifications in favour of regionalism were inserted at the insistence of the Latin American and Arab States. They include the right to individual and collective self-defence as enshrined in Article 51 and the primacy of dispute settlement through regional means (Articles 33(1) and 52(2) and (3)). On the other hand, enforcement action remained under the overriding jurisdiction of the Security Council (Articles 24, 25, 39-42, 53(1) and 54). Interestingly enough, regional activities in fields other than peace and security received scant attention and are not regulated in the Charter.
While the distribution of powers between the UN and regional arrangements is thus concentrated in Articles 51-54 of the Charter, these provisions by no means exhaust the open or oblique references to their intricate relationship. Article 43(3) provides for special agreements for the purpose of providing assistance to the Security Council inter alia with `groups of Members'. Action to carry out decisions of the Security Council shall be taken by all the Members `or by some of them' (Article 48(1)), directly and through `appropriate international agencies' (Article 48(2)). The Military Staff Committee `after consultation with appropriate regional agencies, may establish regional subcommittees' (Article 47(4)). Solution to disputes shall be sought, inter alia, through `resort to regional agencies' (Article 33(1)). In addition, regionalist concepts also appear in the guise of geographical or cultural considerations in the composition of UN organs. In the election of non-permanent Members of the Security Council due regard is to be given also to `equitable geographical distribution' (Article 23(1)). A consideration in the recruitment of staff for the Secretariat is that it should be on `as wide a geographical basis as possible' (Article 101(3)). In the election of the judges of the International Court of Justice `the representation of the main forms of civilization and of the principal legal systems of the world should be assured' (Article 9 ICJ Statute).
An important universalist feature of the Charter is the prevalence of Charter obligations over `any other international agreement' (Article 103). Therefore, any regional agreements that are at variance with the Charter would have to yield. In actual practice, the most important pillar of universalism has turned out to be the provision on membership (Article 4). The almost complete participation of the international community remains the United Nations' greatest strength and source of legitimacy.
Subsequent practice has given much more weight to regionalism than the bare text of the Charter would suggest. This reversal towards regionalism away from a preponderantly universalist concept is the result of a number of factors. One has been the partial failure of the United Nations to come to terms with many of the tasks entrusted to it. Another has been a strong resurgence of group solidarity among Member States. A further factor has been the desire to tackle certain problems in a smaller arena which seemed better adapted to cooperation for these specific purposes. Finally, the attempt to escape the involvement of outside powers with their global strategies has also contributed to this trend.
On the other hand, a number of factors have tempered this flight into regionalism. One has been the desire to gain access through global institutions to resources, notably of an economic nature, not available in the region. Another has been the attempt to evade overbearing regional Powers by resorting to universal organizations in the hope of finding allies in the larger forum of global institutions.
Regionalist features have emerged both inside and outside the United Nations. Internal regionalization has occurred through the composition, structure and decision-making processes of the United Nations. External regionalization has been manifested through formal and informal cooperation with regional bodies. More important than these organizational questions is the distribution of functions in such areas as human rights, economic cooperation and peace and security between universal and regional institutions and the prospects for their constructive cooperation.
* The free viewer (Acrobat Reader) for PDF file is
available at the
Adobe Systems.
1 Edward B. Burling Professor of International Law and Organization,
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies.
2 For comprehensive studies on regionalism see esp. B. Andemicael
(ed.), Regionalism and the United Nations (1979); W. Lang, Der
internationale Regionalismus (1982).
3 L.M. Goodrich, E. Hambro, A.P. Simons, Charter of the United
Nations (1969); R.B. Russell, A History of the United Nations
Charter (1958); Wolf, `Regional Arrangements and the UN Charter', 6 EPIL
(1983) 290; Hummer, Schweitzer, `Article 52, paras. 14-29', in B. Simma (ed.),
The Charter of the United Nations. A Commentary (1994) 679, at
687.
© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part
of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European
Law at the European University
Institute.
This file was last modified:
Tuesday, October 14, 2003 12:13PM