The United Nations has created a body to help the global security and the stable between nations, but they have not developed concrete guidelines for jus post bellum (justice after war). Many questions have not been answered. For example, how much disarmament is just? Who should decide how much disarmament is appropriate? Should all countries follow the same standards and rules of disarmament? These are all the questions we should put into consideration in order to reinforce the justice after war.

In the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), Algeria was determined in (erase) achieving effective progress toward the complete disarmament, prohibition and elimination of all biological and toxic weapons. Algeria also signed Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and pledged to be a non nuclear state in 1995. After that Algeria was among the first countries to sign the Treaty of Pelindaba which established the African continent a nuclear free zone. We partly agree with disarmament of the losing country. But the disarmament should be discuss between the victors, losers, and a fair judge independent panel through the United Nations .

There are several possible solutions that The United Nations could implement in order to improve the jus post bellum questions. First, we think a completely independent body, run by The United Nations, should decide how much disarmament is just for each country. We think the discussion of disarmament should take place with the losing country. The example of World War I shows us that the reason Germany disobeyed the Vesailles Treaty is because the victor countries did not approach losing country. The consensus between the Allied powers did have a German point of view and served as a powerful motivation for revenge from Germany during World War II.We would like to prevent revenge between the two countries after