Does the UN work?

[Vampyrelord]

In my opinion the UN is based on sound principles but is weak and beauracratic. The UN is only as strong as it's members and yet seems powerless to control them, they really, REALLY screwed up in Rwanda (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/568566.stm).

Does the UN need changes? If so, what? Is the UN even a good idea? Should we scrap it altogether? Or is it fine as it is? Can the failure in Rwanda have any justification or hope for redemption?

Your thoughts, please.

[mooks]

The UN is a highly politicized organization that hides behind humanitarian assistance... It is used as a scapegoat or guise for larger nations to exploit opportunities on other nations(China, US,Germany) or within it's resolutions (Israel,Syria,US)...

Only the small groundwork and UNHCR gets the undivided attention of the Press... unlike the real politics that fund and drive the United Nations..

I really think it should be scrapped and build a new Organization from scratch- without added priviledges to certain nations...

[chiking1]

I'm pretty sure that the UN does work, or else countries would be bombing each other right about now...
The UN provides protection for countries, if they are attacked, the UN will aid them, OR, if they are attacking, the UN will help them too... Kinda like the Iraq thing...

[tortuegenial]

I agree with Chiking, what I don't like and it happens quite often is that no one recognizes the efforts and the successes that the UN has had, instead they tend to concentrate more on what the UN hasn't done.
I don't think it's really fair to say that the UN is then useless and weak. Sure Rwanda and Sudan are terrible and unfortunate instances that have happened but then again the UN is not perfect, this is why the are restructuring the Human Rights Commission, which in effect is now the Human Rights Council.
In any case they have done some successful work and I think with the co-operation of and with other countries it will work better in the future.

[mooks]

I'm pretty sure that the UN does work, or else countries would be bombing each other right about now...
The UN provides protection for countries, if they are attacked, the UN will aid them, OR, if they are attacking, the UN will help them too... Kinda like the Iraq thing...

But... countries ARE bombing each other
People are dying in the hundreds by day by the most preventable causes- like clean water or vaccinations.
If the UN were to do their Job, Iraq would have been a side-issue and Sudan and Somalia(sudan has oil! they can go!) would be focus of attention now. Not to mention, while we wage war on inane ideologies-
A war on AIDS would save more lives than has been extinguished in this War on Terror.

All the UN does is condemn the actions the US and Israel, and other atrocities around the world.

[airswifter]

UN is a useless organisation. Commoners are even more trustworthy than UN. When Lebanon and Isreal is killing each other, where are they?
North Korea trying their missiles.....the thing they try to do to stop is talks....talks....talks....
Talk is empty....they wouldnt listen to you.....

[tortuegenial]

Some of you need to think reasonably.
The UN is an organisation that believes in peace. They do not condone violence and in order for them to stand by what they say they try to end conflicts and avoid conflicts in a peaceful and reasonable manner, which at the same time allows people to live their own lives.
Because there are wars and people dying everyday around the world that doesn't mean that the UN is useless. You can't be quick to blame or discredit what the UN is trying to do, it is not easy. Think!! There are a lot of crazy people and governments out there that will do things their own way regardless of the UN or anyone else.
The way you people are arguing against the UN is very much the way the Bush administration does it. Countries that do not abide by the laws brought about by the universality of countries and the UN, then the latter is blamed. So the former takes matters in their own hands, when they themselves mess up they look to the UN to rescue them, if the UN is slow and unable again they are blamed.

[vejitto3]

As long a s there is no world war 3 then they're doing they're jon and so far there hasn't been one so thy're working

[firebug]

Any absolute belief in an ideology will fail you.

This is a world in which absolutes fair poorly - if one does not remain malleable to the situation, then you will always err to one side...overexertion or complete inaction.

If I say "I believe in absolute peace", what then will I do in times of war?

If I say "Only the strong survive", what will I do when there is no outlet to enact my beliefs?

The best kind of people can recognize what mindset is needed for each situation, and can act without letting it consume them.

[Jasel]

Ask the 800,000 + people killed in Rwanda or the people living in Sudan or the Congo. Or the North Koreans' nutcase leader who fires test missiles at Japan. Or Bush who starts a war that winds up costing tens of thousands of lives. In all cases the UN either didn't do anything or couldn't do anything. They're useless.

[akin_t]

Uh no, quite frankly the UN fails at almost everything, some countries *coughamericacough* can disregard the UN without fear of apprehension, sad but true.

[tortuegenial]

Ask the 800,000 + people killed in Rwanda or the people living in Sudan or the Congo. Or the North Koreans' nutcase leader who fires test missiles at Japan. Or Bush who starts a war that winds up costing tens of thousands of lives. In all cases the UN either didn't do anything or couldn't do anything. They're useless.

and what about ending the Iran-Iraq war and withdrawing Soviet troops from Afghanistan, putting an end to civil war in El Salvador and Cyprus, halting cease-fire in several Sub-Saharan countries in Africa, ending wars between Israel and Arab states. You mentioned Congo, the UN helped set up the Congolese government to maintain peace and order bringing their civil war to an end and prevented Katanga from seceding.....these are just some of the 170+ peacekeeping negotiations that the UN has helped establish.

Who else has better helped countries recognize the practice of democracy than the UN, it has enabled South Africa, Nicaragua, Mozambique, Kosovo, East Timor, Namibia, El Salvador, Eritrea and others particpate and hold free and fair elections, and it continues to help Sierra Leone advance as a democratic nation.

The UN has helped with the resettlement of over 2million refugees, helped calm the warlord situation in Afghanistan through peaceful cooperations and dialogue halting further rise of Al Qaeda it has also helped fund 7'000 mine clearance workers...
6 million children around the world have been immunized against polio thanks to 60'000 trained vaccinators from the UN, it has also helped 3 million children return to school including over a million girls. The UN has also provided over 1.3 billion people in rural areas with safe drinking water, global communications has increased, as has adult and child literacy rate and life expectancy while reducing child mortality rates reducing child mortality rates, limited deforastation in over 90 countries.

The UN also provides plenty of illustrative and informative statistics and information ranging upon a very wide scale on over 170 countries. The information that is given out on unheard wars such as in Uganda are reported by the UN, not only conflicts but underdevelopment, countries struggling to develop, environmental concerns, health concerns, humanitarian concerns....the list covers every important issue that the world needs to know about and pay attention to.
This is a brief list of the UN's achievements.


If the United States and other coutries have more power than the UN and they decide to use their power over the UN that does not mean that the UN is completely useless. Who does US go to when in need of help to build Iraq?
The UN tried to use facts and peacful negotiations to avoid a war but the US was more powerful and needing to reassure the world of their power.

By the way ask if you would like or need a longer list.....


and if you are still convinced that the UN is useless then you would have to imagine this world without the UN....
would there be more or less conflicts, where and from who you would get information reports on deforestation, sanitation, or the existence of weapons of mass destruction. If there are more of these problems and conflicts then how are they going to get resolved, who is going to organize annual or regular meetings to try and find solutions and help to these problems, who is going to gather all the nations?
All these and many more questions have to be raised and addressed if you are really interested in finding out whether the UN is useless and whether the world doesn't need the United Nations.

[kaede822]

in my opinion, i dont think the UN is useless. there are numbers of instances wherein the UN has stopped possible war or chaos. in other ways, it has also helped smaller or third-world countries. in a way, UN has also fostered the spirit of peace and collaboration amongst countries.

i could say UN has helped maintain the peace and sanity amongst the countries. people sometimes think that UN is useless because it could not exert as much power. The UN cannot exert power because it is not a governing body..it is not the single organization that controls the member countries. It is however based on the mutual trust and agreement to keep sanity and respect among its members. That amidst our differences (in cultures, beliefs and principles) we still abide by that fact that we can live together, helping each other without chaos and war.

[chipp zanuff]

They are not strong enough to stop Israel who don’t respect the UN decision

[elendil15900]

They are not strong enough to stop Israel who don’t respect the UN decision

physicaly they are strong enough to do it but they dont. in that sense its weak.

[Seren]

I think it has its merits, and I wouldn't call for it's complete dissolvement.

That being said, I would really like if there was a major revamp. UN policy seems to be full of loopholes.

Ultimately, though, it's up to the world to kick each other's asses. If we want change, then we need to kick the gov't. US ignore UN? Kick it's ass. Same for any other country. I don't mean bomb the living daylights out of it- I mean instead of pointing fingers at the UN, the people of any gov't who wants to see it be more effective needs to get more involved in their home country, and with citizens in other countries who are like-minded, to start some change. In the end, the UN is still just a group of people. There's more of us than them, and we have the potential to change the world if we try hard enough.