Richard Holbrooke Quotes

Peace and security of our planet must be based on the collective action of all nations, not a few, however powerful they may be.

I wouldn't give up on the U.N. yet.

When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries is in danger.

The main thing that endears the United Nations to member governments, and so enables it to survive, is its proven capacity to fail, and to be seen to fail.

The United Nations is a failed institution in its current form.

Without the U. N., world politics is inconceivable.

In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its Members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.

The day is coming when no single nation, however powerful, can undertake by itself to keep the peace outside its borders.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

Republican committal for an Association of Nations, cooperating in sublime accord, to attain and preserve peace through justice rather than force, determined to add to security through international law, so clarified that no misconstruction can be possible without affronting world honor.

There is, and there will be, an increasing demand for a principled global security provider, for a superpower that believes in multilateralism and cooperation.

Britain is committed to peace and security, and a leading supporter of the international rules-based system.

My alternative to American superpower is the UN and I might add when China becomes the worlds greatest superpower you will need it too.

Terrorism gravely threatens international peace and security, and as a solution, the power and apparent finality of force are seductive.

The United Nations is our one great hope for a peaceful and free world.

There are many who criticise the United Nations. And those of us who know this institution well know that it is not immune from criticism. But those who argue against the United Nations advance no credible argument as to what should replace it. Whatever its imperfections, the United Nations represents a necessary democracy of states.

I have concluded that the U.N. can do a few things well.

American foreign policy, for all its shortcomings, has underpinned political stability around the world.

To solve the problem of organizing world peace we must establish world law and order.

There is not much danger of the smaller nations if the big nations will behave.

The U.N. can be very frustrating and at times impotent, but it can also be a valuable forum for discussion and resolution of world problems. We should not walk away from it just because it's failed to live up to its promise.

This means that the search for a formula of European cooperation in connection with the League of Nations, far from weakening the authority of this latter must and can only tend to strengthen it, for it is closely connected with its aims.

It is a commonplace that the League of Nations is not yet-what its most enthusiastic protagonists intended it to be.

Attempts to settle crises by unilateral sanctions outside the framework of U.N. Security Council decisions threaten international peace and stability. Such attempts are counterproductive and contradict the norms and principles of international law.

If the U.N. didn't exist, we'd be inventing it right now.