1 Even still, it is articulated that realpolitik is taken into consideration when states are called upon to show "good-neighbourliness."2 It is interesting to note that Article 2 of the Charter states that "Members will not use threat of the use of force in their conduct of international relations against the "territorial integrity or political independence of any state.""3 This clause, though vague, is of extreme relevance in the most current example of a foreign-installed democracy: Iraq, to be discussed in further detail later on. .
There are no forces active in trying to change these laws. Rather, the United States and Britain have used unique arguments in dodging the laws in their crusade to liberate Iraq. Their motivation has appeared to be the idea of a safer world: when a people has something to live for under freedom and democracy, they are not likely to sacrifice their and others" lives in order to make a point. So far, the proposed solution to a perilous globe has been to use force to threaten a government into giving its federation a face-lift - or the West will do it for them. Oddly, this is a direct contradiction of Article 2 of the UN Charter, as it is articulated above.
Like it or not, America and its supporters have become involved in nation building under the umbrella of noble principles. Its fresh social-worker image gives hope for a better world while simultaneously trying to cover up its past mistakes in the same line of work. Historical examples can attest to the fact that true democracy comes from a country's people, a grassroots operation - not a head of state with different religious beliefs, cultural practices, and social understandings than the people who will supposedly benefit from a brand-name democracy. The act of forcing a democracy upon a people, though admirable, is not even consistent with the original idea of democracy. A nation's people should have the freedom to choose which government they live by.