This article reviews the relationship between international organizations and peace, particularly the meaning of the UN system to the construction of peace. The UN was established as a constitutionalization of the world, with the Security Council as power holder for the maintenance of international peace and security. While this innovative scheme was frustrated with the advent of the Cold W ar, another aspect of the UN grew, which was essentially functionalistic, with an increasing number of specialized agencies and other organizations for operational activities. Thus the UN system started with constitutionalism and grew into one embodying functionalism, which is not identical with the EC/EU type of functionalism, in the sense that that former has not aimed at political integration.
In the meantime, this functionalism à la UN, while successful in its own way, seems to have reached its limits in that it appears incapable of bringing about negative peace. It is why there has appeared a trend, at least in Europe, to revive constitutionalism per se under the heading of international constitutionalism. It ranges from protests against unilateralism to constituting a world state which supersedes the sovereignty of states.
On the other hand, another possibility is emerging of turning functionalism into something qualitatively different, that is, functionalism relying on the potentiality of the civil society rather than solely depending on the cooperation between states. In view of the growing empowerment of the global civil society, this may engender a new type of functionalism which, in tandem with a moderate type of constitutionalism without an idea of world state, could possibly contribute to the formation of a world order.
Order is, according to Dieter Senghaas, something that has historically been formed step by step against the egocentric will of each member of any society. The authors of world order have to be ready to accept this complicated process which never pleases everybody.
