Current and recent events are exposing open ends in the body of international law concerned with the use of force – as well as the deficiencies of the United Nations Security Council to respond to “new” security threats or effectively counter unilateralism.

This paper analyses the extent to which the recent proposals for United Nations reform have satisfactorily addressed the three following areas: the use of force in self-defence; the role of the Security Council in the collective security system; and finally, the newly developed concept of a “responsibility to protect” as the foundation of humanitarian intervention. Are changes in the legal framework regulating the use of force needed, and acknowledged in the UN reform agenda? Or are the existing provisions of the Charter sufficient to address the full range of threats to international peace and security?

The attempt to answer these questions will include an analysis of current and recent State practices, relevant international instruments, and proposals made in the context of UN reform before and during 2005 World Summit.