AbdulQadir AL-AMEEN
| Abstract: | Global security institutions, including the United Nations Security Council and regional organizations, are central to addressing contemporary threats to international peace and stability. Yet, their legitimacy remains a subject of intense debate, particularly when their actions or inactions are perceived as inconsistent with international law or global expectations. This paper investigates the intricate relationship between international law and the legitimacy of global security institutions, analyzing how legal frameworks both empower and constrain their operations. By examining foundational legal documents, customary norms, and landmark interventions, including Kosovo, Libya, and Syria, the study identifies key sources of legitimacy and highlights persistent challenges such as selective enforcement, the dominance of major powers, and gaps in representation. The analysis extends to emerging issues like humanitarian intervention without Security Council authorization, responses to cyber threats, and the increasing influence of non-state actors. Drawing on comparative case studies, empirical evidence, and recent developments, the paper proposes avenues for institutional reform including greater inclusivity, enhanced accountability, and legal oversight, to strengthen credibility and effectiveness. The findings emphasize that adherence to international law and the pursuit of inclusive, transparent governance are essential for global security institutions to maintain legitimacy and fulfill their mandates in an evolving international order. |
| Keywords: | International law, legitimacy, global security institutions, United Nations, institutional reform |