Abstract
<jats:p>In the ever-changing modern world order, not one state can sufficiently ensure its security on its own. One of the most effective means of solving this problem (especially in the case of small states) is a system of collective security, the formation of which is based on the idea of Kant’s “perpetual peace”. Among the fundamental principles of collective security there are the consideration of aggression against someone as aggression against everyone, and elimination (parrying) of it through joint efforts, the indivisibility of security, etc. The first collective security organization was the League of Nations (1920 – 1946). However, this experience was not crowned with success due to a number of objective and subjective reasons, in particular, due to the fact that the heads of states – its founders – were unable to change their political thinking, putting their own interests above collective ones. Even during the WW2, the idea of creating a new collective security organization took shape, which embodied in the form of the United Nations. When creating it, the shortcomings and weaknesses of the League were taken into account, thanks to which the UN exists to this day. Unlike the League, whose main goal was to prevent the outbreak of wars, the main goal of the UN is the socio-economic, cultural sustainable development of humanity in conditions of peace and security on a healthy planet. However, the UN is not also without drawbacks, which are especially pronounced in relation to Armenia, when, in violation of the basic provisions of the UN Charter, the aggressor and its victim are essentially equated, when the fundamental principle of self-determination of nations becomes the subject of political games of the great powers.</jats:p>