In September, the United Nations (U.N.) held their annual General Assembly debate. The UNGA is an event where world leaders, diplomats, activists, policymakers and many other individuals gather at the U.N.’s headquarters in New York to discuss the world’s ongoing challenges. The theme for this year was “Better Together: eighty years and more for peace, development, and human rights.”
In many respects, this year’s UNGA meeting was particularly historic as France used the occasion to officially recognize the State of Palestine. Similarly, former Al-Qaeda terrorist turned statesman Ahmed Al-Sharaa made his debut by giving a speech in front of the UNGA.
What ended up taking center stage was President Donald Trump’s speech, which insisted the U.N. has failed at its job to end wars. However, the truth is the U.N. did not fail. It was never allowed to succeed.
The history of the United Nations
Following the end of World War II, the world recognized the League of Nations had failed to prevent another global conflict. As a result, the U.N. was officially established on Oct. 24, 1945, to prevent another world war. By 1946, the League of Nations had been formally disbanded. The original members of the U.N. represented 51 countries, and over time, the members expanded after decolonization and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Today, there are officially 193 member states in the U.N., with each having a seat in the General Assembly, while the State of Palestine and the Holy See are permanent non-member observers. (Taiwan is not a member of the U.N.).
Additionally, the U.N. has numerous bodies, including the General Assembly, the Security Council, the World Health Organization, the International Monetary Fund and others who oversee various facets of global policy, such as international development, public health, security and refugee assistance.
Complaint no. 1: The UN does not end wars
As stated in Trump’s speech, one of the main complaints about the U.N. is it has not lived up to its mission of stopping wars. However, the notion of the U.N. being unable to stop wars is quite nuanced given the evolution and complexity of conflict.
On the one hand, proponents of the U.N. will insist there has been no new world wars since World War II. While a direct war between two or more great powers has not occurred, the U.N.’s role in preventing it is debatable. One could argue that the advent of nuclear weapons has prevented a war between great powers because of mutually assured destruction, rather than the threat of international diplomatic isolation by the U.N.
Moreover, the nature of conflict between great powers has evolved to include cyberwarfare, information warfare, economic warfare, proxy warfare and other forms that allow for plausible deniability. As such, these tactics make it harder for the U.N. to mediate if it remains unclear as to whether those actions can be directly linked to a specific government.
Thus, what has become a common occurrence since World War II are conflicts between smaller countries, such as Iraq/Kuwait, Armenia/Azerbaijan and Thailand/Cambodia, as well as conflicts within countries, known as intrastate conflicts or civil wars. The common causes for intrastate conflicts are generally bad governance, corruption, dictatorial rule, ethnic tensions, economic inequality and many other factors that result in state breakdown. Some examples of such conflicts include the Syrian Civil War, the Afghan War and the Sri Lankan Civil War.
When it comes to these types of conflicts, the U.N. has largely failed to end them, mainly due to the U.N. Security Council (UNSC). The UNSC, the U.N.’s primary body for crisis prevention, is made up of 15 members, five of which are permanent. The permanent members, known as the P5, are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. What gives the P5 immense power is that they can veto any UN resolution to protect themselves and their allies, which can impede conflict resolution.
One example is when the Russians and Chinese vetoed many resolutions to Syria’s conflict, since Moscow and Beijing were close allies with the Assad regime. The United States has vetoed many resolutions as well calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, due to the close U.S.-Israel relationship.
Complaint no. 2: The UN does not represent the Global South
The other main criticism the U.N. receives is that it does not represent the current state of world affairs.
As noted by a former Indian diplomat, Rajiv Bhatia, “The U.N. created in 1945 has remained frozen in time. Its institutional structure remains unchanged even as its agenda has evolved over the past seven decades.” Bhatia’s statement reflects a growing consensus among most countries that the Global South needs more representation in U.N. bodies, such as within the U.N. Security Council. Likewise, the current P5 members — France, the U.S., China, Russia and the U.K. — have all rhetorically supported expanding the UNSC to make it more representative of the Global South.
However, problems arise regarding who will be the newest permanent member as disagreements within the Global South emerge. For example, Argentina and Mexico are opposed to Brazil’s membership, and Pakistan vehemently opposes India’s membership. Importantly, considering the numerous instances of countries violating UNSC resolutions, it is worth raising the question of whether obtaining a permanent seat at the Security Council will actually benefit the Global South.
Aside from the role of the UNSC, many countries in the Global South that actively oppose U.N. involvement in resolving problems within their countries and regions argue it violates their state sovereignty, which is a fundamental principle outlined in the U.N. Charter. According to Article 2 of the charter, “nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction.”
In practice, this principle gets used by autocratic governments to brush off international criticism of their human rights abuses as violating their country’s sovereignty. Considering this, many argue organizations such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization are more appealing to the Global South precisely because of the emphasis placed on non-interference.
As the U.N. celebrates its 80th year of existence, it is tempting for many to give up on the organization due to its numerous failures. However, in the era of growing multipolarity and countless global crises, for the U.N. to effectively implement its stated vision of preventing conflict, it must be allowed to do so in the first place. A starting point could be for different member-states to take turns in hosting the UNGA summit to prevent situations in which the host country denies visas to certain delegations.
Featured image: Photo by Hugo Magalhaes/Pexels
Edited by Abbigail Earl & James Sutton
Editor’s note: This article has been corrected for punctuation since its original publication
