Now, more than ever before, the United Nations has reaffirmed itself as an imperative organ leading the tumultuous world of international relations. With pivotal events such as the outbreak of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the United Nations has become a decisive power, able to implement and adjudicate the grounds of international law. However, more and more people are starting to question the impartiality of such an organization, debating whether or not the powers it was granted back in 1945 are still used for the initial purpose of balancing the post-war world.
It has been 78 years since the representatives of 51 states got together in the hills of California and started drafting what we now call the United Nations Charter, and therefore created one of the most influential organizations of the modern world. Composed of the General Assembly and its 6 committees, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, the International Courts, and its Secretariat, the United Nations was destined to promote peace and stability for the sake of avoiding the tragic repercussions of the two World Wars. Whether or not the organization still follows the same objective is, however, debatable and up for interpretation.
So, why exactly are people upset about the actions of the UN? Well, going back to its structure, one of the most relevant and powerful branches of the organization represents the United Nations Security Council. Within this 15-seat committee, 5 countries (also known as the Permanent 5) are always present. The People's Republic of China, the French Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America, and the Russian Federation are considered the most influential nations of the world in terms of security, having been granted a veto right for the implementation of resolutions in the Council. The voting power has been contested through the years as imperative actions and measures have been halted due to the negative vote of one permanent member. The recent UN-mediated ceasefire in the Gaza Strip overturned by the vote of the USA is a perfect example of the veto powers dramatically impacting the security background of the world. The question that dramatically divides opinion is "Should a single country decide the fate of the international community with just one vote?"
Another flaw of the United Nations that people consider just as inefficient is the matter of jurisdiction. The United Nations enforces international law only through limited means. One of the judicial bodies of the organization is the International Criminal Court, responsible for adjudicating individuals for crimes against the Statue of Rome, which China does not recognize. Therefore, all Chinese citizens are conveniently immune to the actions of the Court and cannot be trialed by it, as the judgments and measures are inapplicable. This leads people to believe that an international legislative power that can simply not be recognized is one of poor efficiency.
Nonetheless, it is important to take note of the considerable improvements that the United Nations has brought to the International community. It is after all unprofessional to point fingers without also considering the benefits of such a significant body. The organization has expanded its power from peacebuilding to promoting education, preserving culture, and also involving itself in the affairs of worldwide healthcare through the World Health Organisation. It remains up to each individual to conclude for themselves the debate on the efficiency of the organization and whether or not its contributions to the world stage overrule its arguably outdated powers.
Bibliography:
https://www.thestatesman.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/un.jpg
Mingst, Karen A., Margaret P. Karns, and Alynna J. Lyon. The United Nations in the 21st century. Routledge, 2022.
https://theweek.com/politics/disunited-nations-has-the-un-lost-its-relevance
https://www.euronews.com/2023/09/20/is-the-united-nations-still-relevant-and-effective
Comments