( Six minute read)

The United Nations is the most powerful international organisation in the world. Founded after World War Two, the UN aims to maintain global peace and security though international cooperation and dialogue.

Although the UN is seen as a bed-rock of the post-War world order, it is regularly criticised for its failings.

There are some who say the world would be better without the UN. Bedevilled by a litany of challenges, including gross underfunding, bloated bureaucracy, disunity, and geopolitical rivalry among the permanent members of the Security Council.

Would it be?

Today, many countries still put their own geo-political objectives ahead of any UN requirements.

This is the main failing of the United Nations.  Western powers, for example, are overrepresented in the five permanent members. Entire regions lack a permanent seat but nevertheless are bound to Security Council resolutions. Today, it lacks strong support in popular culture.

—————–

The United Nations stands at a crossroads.

The need to reform the United Nations is critical.

Political leaders, experts, and civil society agree that the United Nations is lagging behind global change, failing to anticipate emerging risks, and not adequately resolving or mitigating global challenges.

There is no longer any doubt that three primary threats endanger the existence of humanity: Climate change, infectious disease, and nuclear weapons are the core global challenges but disruptive technological, societal, and ecological developments impose new challenges that require new partnerships beyond the current state-centric global architecture.

The age of disinformation and ever-increasing influence of social media has left truth and facts more coloured by predesignated concepts and ideas.

Ideally, the Security Council should be stripped of veto power when a matter relating to any these existential threats is on the agenda.

The greatest challenge confronting the organization—one that has repeatedly rendered it unable to act decisively on critical global issues—is intransigence among the permanent members of the Security Council.

At a time of profound global change and increasing competition over values, treating climate change as simply another environmental problem rather than a crosscutting factor affecting all aspects of human life should have a dedicated UN institution focusing on Climate change not as one problem among many, but as a unique crisis that affects all activities.

————————

UN reform has been on the agenda since the organization was created in 1945.

The Security Council as currently constituted in terms of membership, functions, and powers cannot effectively respond to the myriad crises engulfing the world.

As powerful countries move toward unilateralism, populism, and nationalism at the expense of multilateralism and collective action, a united and forward-looking Security Council capable of effectively driving the wider United Nations to achieve its goals is sine qua non.

——————-

What would actually happen if the United Nations collapsed, or was disbanded?

Realistically, there are two main ways that the United Nations could collapse. There are many ways that the UN might cease to exist but these can be divided into ‘internal’ and ‘external’ causes.

Internal:  Financial collapse, or a major internal scandal, or the UN deciding voluntarily to disband itself.

External: National governments collectively deciding to dispend the UN, some major, or many minor countries deciding to leave or countries withdrawing funding. Data governance at the global level lags well behind technological developments.

The collapse of the UN would also remove a key arena for global dialogue and could be followed by a potential re-alignment of the world order as there would no longer be a forum for dialogue between nations and its conceivable with a vacuum in international law many conflicts could reignite.

The first thing that would happen if the UN collapsed is that funding to the UN’s international programmes would stop.

It is likely that it would be replaced with another inter-governmental organisation.

The pre-curser to the UN was the League of Nations, disbanded in 1946.

Historians generally agree the League of Nations failed for five main reasons. These are:

• It failed to encompass all countries, with major powers such as the United States not joining. Many countries also left the League of Nations or only joined for a short-time.
• Countries put their own geo-political objectives ahead of the League of Nations requirement for collective security.
• The League of Nations did not have its own army, and so relied on member states to use military force. Many were not willing to as their populations did not support another war.
• Disarmament was a major aim of the League of Nations, meaning countries were encouraged to reduce military spending. This meant intervening militarily against countries that went against the League was made more difficult.
• The League had no power to stop countries taking aggressive action. When countries such as Germany or Japan began attacking their neighbours, the League was powerless to stop them.

——————-

Let’s take each one and see if the modern United Nations could fail for the same reasons?

It currently supports the global order. All major nations, especially those included in the Security Council, have a vested interest in retaining the United Nations as it helps them maintain power.

Another reason why the United Nations is unlikely to collapse is that, although there are many legitimate criticisms of the UN, any organisation that were to replace it would unlikely be more successful.

This is because any global forum of nations requires a degree of flexibility and pragmatism in order to incorporate all countries. Although this means the UN’s power to affect change is limited, a more controlling inter-governmental organisation would see nations leaving when decisions went against them.

———————–

Today, everyone seems to have problems with multilateralism, which is eroding the authority of global institutions.

More than ever the world needs collective action.

Working out how to bring the United Nations closer to “we the people” and remaining relevant for future generations should drive the organization as it enters its next phase.

It’s the place where leaders come and give public speeches but that really nothing meaningful gets done.

The Security Council, which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security, has often been paralyzed by the veto power of its five permanent members – the United States, China, Russia, France, and the United Kingdom. This has made it difficult for the Security Council to take decisive action in conflicts such as the Syrian civil war, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and more recently in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

It is unable to stop war, it is unable to end famine, it is unable to stop conflicts, it is unable to manage migration, it does not push for global disbarment

Somewhere, the spirit of collectivist has to be regenerated.

The ineffectiveness of the UN are simply a reflection of those dysfunctional characteristics of the international system.

The most important prerequisite for an effective global institution may be a concert of powers.

—————

There is no credible alternative in sight so the UN must be retooled and updated to tackle today’s challenges

Can 193 nations with competing agendas undertake major reforms?  NO!

However we are inching closer to “a great fracture.” Conflicts, coups and chaos are surging. The climate crisis is growing. Divides are deepening between military and economic powers, the richer North and poorer South, East and West. A new Rubicon has been crossed in artificial intelligence.

Can it be reformed?

THIS CAN ONLY BE ACHIVED IF THE UN IS BROKEN UP INTO A MORE TARGETED ORGANISATION.

By creating an international antivirus consortium, protecting biodiversity, and strengthening warning protocols within UN agencies.

We cannot inch towards agreement while the world races towards a precipice.

It must and we all must unite behind a common purpose, or we all be speaking to an empty room.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com