Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T18:27:41.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Conflict and the United Nations*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2011

Quincy Wright
Quincy Wright
Affiliation:
University of Chicago, School of International Studies, University of Delhi, India
Get access

Extract

THE United Nations Charter repeatedly refers to “disputes or situations” and to “threats to the peace or breach of the peace” but does not use the word “conflict.” In the Kellogg-Briand Pact, however, the parties agreed “that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them, shall never be solved except by pacific means.” A “conflict” appears to be less formulated than a “dispute” but more formulated than a “situation.” A “conflict” does not necessarily involve violence as does a “breach of the peace,” but violence is probable, as in a “threat to the peace.” Thus conflict always involves a considerable degree of tension. The close relation of conflict to violence is indicated by the derivation of the term from the Latin word confligere, meaning “to strike together.” Thus, physical conflict is suggested.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , October 1957 , pp. 24 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Park, R. E. and Burgess, E., Introduction to the Science of Sociology, Chicago, 1924, pp. 574ff.Google Scholar; Ogburn, W. F. and Nimkoff, M. F., Sociology, New York, 1940, pp. 346, 369.Google Scholar See also Wright, Quincy, A Study of War, Chicago, 1942, pp. 956, 1439ff.Google Scholar; idem, Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, Berkeley, Calif., 1954, p. 146. Singer, Kurt defines conflict as “a critical state of tension occasioned by the presence of mutually incompatible tendencies within an organismic whole the functional continuity or structural integrity of which is thereby threatened” (“The Resolution of Conflict,” Social Research, XVI, December 1949, p. 230).Google Scholar

2 Moore, J. B., Digest of International Law, Washington, D.C., 1906, 11, p. 412.Google Scholar

3 Jessup, Philip C., Transnational Law, New Haven, Conn., 1956, p. 2.Google Scholar

4 Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan (1651)Google Scholar, ch. 13.

5 Westermarck, E. A., Ethical Relativity, London, 1932.Google Scholar

6 Wright, Quincy, The Study of International Relations, New York, 1955, pp. 448ff.Google Scholar

7 Vattel, Emerich, Le Droit des Gens (1758), Fenwick, trans., Washington, D.C., 1916, Preface, p. 9a.Google Scholar

8 Hobbes, , Leviathan, chs. 13, 17.Google Scholar

9 Machiavelli, Niccolò, The Prince (1513)Google Scholar, ch. 14.

10 Toynbee, Arnold J., A Study of History, Oxford, 1934, 1, p. 62Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, p. 117.Google Scholar

11 Hobbes, Leviathan, ch. 13; Locke, John, Concerning Civil Government, Second Essay (1690)Google Scholar, ch. 2, par. 14.

12 Kautilya, , Arthasastra (3rd century B.C.), Shamasastry trans., Mysore, Wesleyan Mission Press, 1929.Google Scholar

13 Maslow, A. H., “The Dominance Drive as a Determiner of Social Behavior in Infrahuman Primates,” Psychological Bulletin, XXII (1935), pp. 714ff.Google Scholar See also idem, Journal of Genetic Psychology, XLVIII (1936), pp. 261ff., and XLIX (1937), pp. 197ff.; Psychological Review, XLIV (1937), pp. 420ff.; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 43Google Scholar ff., 491fr.

14 Wright, , A Study of War, p. 1238.Google Scholar

15 Thomas Hobbes, like some modern advocates of “world government,” thought this implied permanent and total subordination to a sovereign commonwealth (op.cit., ch. 17), but John Locke, like modern advocates of “international organization,” thought it implied only a “giving up of all the power, necessary to the ends for which they unite into society, to the majority of the community, unless they expressly agreed in any number greater than the majority” (op.cit., ch. 8, par. 99).

18 Wright, Quincy, “Intervention, 1956,” American Journal of International Law, LI (1957). pp. 257ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Matthew 16:25; Mark 8:35; Luke 9:24. Hobbes, like modern “realists,” was convinced that neither morals nor reason would assure observance of this injunction but “without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war” (op.cit., ch. 13, par. 8).

18 Deutsch, Karl W., “Self-referent Symbols and Self-referent Communication Patterns,” in Bryson, Lyman, et al., eds., Symbols and Values: An Initial Study (13th Symposium on Science, Philosophy and Religion), New York, 1954, pp. 619, 628Google Scholar; idem, “international Communication, the Media and Flow,” Public Opinion Quarterly, XX (Spring 1956), pp. 143ff. David Riesman has formulated this distinction in terms of the relative influence of “inner-direction” and “other-direction” (The Lonely Crowd, New Haven, Conn., 1950). See also Wright, , The Study of International Relations, pp. 274ff., 294, 433.Google Scholar

19 Willey, M. M. and Rice, Stuart A., “The Agencies of Communication,” in Ogburn, W. F., ed., Recent Social Trends, New York, 1933, 1, p. 217Google Scholar; Lasswell, H. D., World Politics and Personal Insecurity, New York, 1935, pp. 203ff.Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 174ff.Google Scholar

20 Durbin, E. F. M. and Bowlby, John, Personal Aggressiveness and War, New York, 1939, pp. 19, 84Google Scholar, 109; Lasswell, , op.cit., pp. 39Google Scholar, 166; Alexander, Franz, “The Psychiatric Aspects of War and Peace,” American Journal of Sociology, XLVI (1941), p. 526Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 287Google Scholar, 1203, 1461; idem, Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, pp. 164ff., 764.

21 McLeod, W. C., The Origin and History of Politics, New York, 1931Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 382Google Scholar, 763; idem, Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, pp. 150ff.

22 Richardson, L. F., Generalized Foreign Politics (Monograph supplements, British Journal of Psychology, Vol. XXIII), Cambridge, Eng., 1939, p. 7Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 1268Google Scholar, 1482.

23 Hobbes, Leviathan, ch. 13.

24 Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 257ff.Google Scholar, 762–63. The recent “self-determination” of many nations may be a reflection of the influence of the United Nations in ameliorating the international “state of nature.”

25 See note 10.

26 An outline for research on international conflicts from these points of view was published in the Western Political Quarterly, X (June 1957), pp. 263–75.

27 Wright, , The Study of International Relations, pp. 544Google Scholar, 555–59.

28 Northrop, F. S. C., The Meeting of East and West, New York, 1946.Google Scholar

29 Parsons, Talcott and Shils, E. A., eds., Toward a General Theory of Action, Cambridge, Mass., 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Morris, Charles, Paths of Life: Preface to a World Religion, New York, 1942Google Scholar; idem, Varieties of Human Value, Chicago, 1956.

31 Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 824ff.Google Scholar

32 These points were brought out in discussion of a paper by Professor Adda Bozeman at the Columbia University Seminar on Peace on April 30 and May 14, 1957.

33 Snyder, Richard C., et al., Decision-making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics, Princeton, N.J., 1954Google Scholar; Easton, David, “An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems,” World Politics, IX (April 1957), pp. 383ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 839ff.Google Scholar, citing Wilson, Woodrow, War Address, April 2, 1917Google Scholar, and Machiavelli, , Discourses, Detmold trans., 1, p. 59.Google Scholar

35 Machiavelli, The Prince, chs. 1, 2, 3, 6; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 220ff.Google Scholar, 828, 1003.

36 Spencer, Herbert, Principles of Sociology (1896), 1, pp. 556ff.Google Scholar, and 11, pp. 378, 675ff.; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 829ff.Google Scholar

37 Mazzini, G., To the Young Men in Italy (1859)Google Scholar, reprinted in SirZimmern, Alfred, Modern Political Doctrines, London, 1939, pp. 176ff.Google Scholar; Acton, Lord, History of Freedom, London, 1909, p. 295Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 828Google Scholar, 987ff.

38 L. F. Richardson, op.cit. (note 22); and idem, “Threats and Security,” in Psychological Factors of Peace and War, New York, 1950, pp. 221ff.; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 1472ff.Google Scholar

39 A good history from this point of view remains to be written for the post-World War II period. For the pre-Soviet period, see Laserson, Max M., The American Impact on Russia—Diplomatic and Ideological—1784–1917, New York, 1950.Google Scholar For the interwar and World War II period, see Yakhontoff, Victor A., U.S.S.R. Foreign Policy, New York, 1945.Google Scholar

40 Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 1240ff.Google Scholar, 1276ff., 1466ff., 1484ff.

41 Cooley, Charles Horton, Human Nature and the Social Order, New York, 1902;Google ScholarWright, , The Study of International Relations, p. 427.Google Scholar

42 Lewin, Kurt, A Dynamic Theory of Personality, New York, 1935Google Scholar; Wright, , The Study of International Relations, p. 428.Google Scholar

43 Barghoorn, Frederick C., The Soviet Image of the United States: A Study in Distortion, New York, 1950.Google Scholar

44 Dewey, John, Theory of Valuation (International Encyclopedia of Unified Science), Chicago, 1939, 11, p. 65Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, p. 1116.Google Scholar

45 Harold, and Sprout, Margaret, Foundations of National Power, Princeton, N.J., 1945Google Scholar; Wright, , The Study of International Relations, pp. 138Google Scholar, 546ff.; idem, A Study of War, pp. 278, 746, 753, 636ff.; idem, Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, pp. 245, 352; Morgenthau, Hans, Politics Among Nations, New York, 1948, p. 80.Google Scholar

46 Americans who have negotiated with Soviet representatives display considerable variation in interpreting the difficulties. See Dennett, Raymond and Johnson, Joseph E., eds., Negotiating with the Russians, Boston, 1951.Google Scholar

47 Black, C. E., “Marxism, Leninism, and Soviet Communism,” World Politics, IX (April 1957), p. 412.Google Scholar

48 Wright, , Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, p. 160Google Scholar; idem, The Study of International Relations, pp. 379, 429.

49 Churchill, Winston S., House of Commons Debate, November 3, 1953, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 520, col. 30.Google Scholar

50 Wright, , Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, p. 312.Google Scholar

51 The conditions which have tended to unstabilize the balance of power and pave the way for universal conquest and destruction of civilizations in the past are discussed in Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 112ff.Google Scholar, 380ff., 760ff., ii43ff.

52 Ketcham, Ralph L., “Notes on James Madison's Sources for the Tenth Federalist Paper,” Midwest Journal of Political Science, 1 (May 1957), pp. 20ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

53 The conditions tending to make a balance of power stable are discussed in Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 755ff., 1389ff.Google Scholar

54 In the following suggestions the writer has benefited by the 10th Report and attached papers of the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, Strengthening the United Nations, New York, 1957.Google Scholar

55 Catherine Senf, “A Proposal for Weighting Votes in the UN Assembly,” in Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, 9th Report, Charter Review Conference, New York, 1955, pp. 119ff.

56 Visscher, Charles de, Theory and Reality in Public International Law, Corbett trans., Princeton, N.J., 1957, p. 328.Google Scholar

57 Wright, Quincy, et al., Research for Peace (Institute for Social Research, Oslo), Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing Co., 1954, p. 4.Google Scholar

58 Wright, Quincy, “The Legal Background in the Far East,” in Wright, , et al., Legal Problems in the Far Eastern Conflict (Institute of Pacific Relations), New York, 1941, pp. 3ff.Google Scholar; H. Lauterpacht, “The Principles of Non-Recognition in International Law,” in ibid., pp. 136ff.; “Summary of Round Table Discussion,” in ibid., pp. 182ff.

59 Wright, “Intervention, 1956,” loc.cit. (note 16).

60 Wright, Quincy, Contemporary International Law: A Balance Sheet, New York, 1955.Google Scholar

61 Wright, Quincy, “The Prospects of International Law,” Proceedings of the American Society of International Law, Washington, D.C., 1956, pp. 2ff.Google Scholar

62 Wright, Quincy, “Domestic Jurisdiction and the Competence of United Nations Organs,” in Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, 9th Report, op.cit., pp. 42ff.Google Scholar

63 Ibid., pp. 7ff.; Wright, Quincy, “International Law and the United Nations,” Cursos Monograficos (Academia Inter Americana de derecho comparado e internacional), Havana, 1956, v, pp. 319ff.Google Scholar

64 Wright, Quincy, “Congress and the Treaty Making Power,” Proceedings of the American Society of International Law, Washington, D.C., 1952, pp. 43ff.Google Scholar

65 Wright, , “International Law and the United Nations,” loc.cit., p. 325Google Scholar; idem, Problems of Stability and Progress in International Relations, pp. 22ff.; idem, The Study of International Relations, pp. 316ff.; idem, “International Organization and Peace,” Western Political Quarterly, VIII (June 1955), pp. 149ff.; idem, A Study of War, p. 1295.

66 Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 169ff.Google Scholar, 267, 1027, 1237. Aristotle thought a person who is “unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god” (Politics, 1, 2, 3).

67 Such a gap has often indicated the impending demise of a civilization. Toynbee, , op.cit., VI, p. 319Google Scholar; Wright, , A Study of War, pp. 164Google Scholar, 257ff.; 370, 386, 402ff.; Visscher, De, op.cit., p. 364.Google Scholar