Points: 1. UN role in conflict resolution and socio-economic intervention.
2. Some of its successful actions and some of its failures.
3. Most of its failures arose in trying to enforce peace in conflicts within nations. Causes.
4. Many of its successes are on the socio-economic front
5. Impact of changes in world order on the role of UN and the need to reinvent itself.
After the first World War, many nations of the world, conscious of both their global responsibilities and the ever-looming threat of war, got together and formed League of Nations. They pledged to free mankind from the ravages of war.
But, over a period of time League of Nations became powerless and it could not prevent the second World War, including the brutal atom bomb attack on Japan. Then, fifty nations joined hands and took an oath to abide by a charter signed by these countries on June26, 1945. Thus, the United Nations (UN) was born as a successor to the League of Nations. The number of the members of the UN has grown to nearly 200 now.
The various roles of the UN can broadly be divided in two categories. The first group consists of activities like resolving conflicts peace-making and peace keeping. The second group of activities are in the socio-economic front and also include welfare programmes. In this, the UN is active through its numerous organisations like UNICEF, UNFPA, UNDP and the UNHRC. The Economic and Social Council of the UN also coordinates as many as sixteen UN-related inter-governmental agencies. Some of these specialised agencies are UNESCO, ILO, IBRD, IMF and WMO.
The United Nations, which succeeded the League of Nations, resolved to save subsequent generations from the ravages of war. Other main purposes of the UN include maintenance of international peace and security, prevention through collective measures of member-nations of threats to peace, peaceful negotiations of international disputes, promotion of decolonisation and self-determination and international cooperation in social, economic, cultural and humanitarian fields.
In the recent past, though, certain changes have occurred in the world order which have impelled many nations to call for a redefinition of the role of the UN. Let is consider the role of the UN as it has been, the emerging world order and finally the new definitions which might enhance UN role in the future.
One of the recent and most creditable achievements of the UN has been its mission in Cambodia. The UN won laurels for itself and successfully supervised the elections and establishment of a democratic government in Cambodia. But of late some of its peace keeping operations have not met with much success and questions have been raised regarding the future functioning of the UN.
The Arab-Isreli peace accords as well as the establishment of a multiracial democratic constitution in South Africa have taken place mostly outside the framework of the UN.
The UN-peace keeping operations in Somalia and the former Yugoslavia, for example, have met with little success. In fact, the UN has had to withdraw from Somalia, leaving behind chaos. Faith in the UN has been receding and its reputation as a peacemaker and peacekeeper has suffered serious setbacks due to its inability to prevent bloodshed. The UN-observed elections in Angola were soon annulled by renewal of fighting. Later negotiations, though observed and encouraged by the UN, have largely taken place through efforts of the two warring factions. The peace keeping operations to end the Liberian Civil War did not see UN participation. Clashes between rival mujahideen groups in Afghanistan incapacitated the UN, which anyway was just playing a mediatory role in the Afghan crisis.
The United Nations, when established, was not formed with the intention to enforce peace in conflicts within a nation arising in civil war situations. Recently though, it finds itself increasingly involved in such situations. Some of these situations are further compounded by across-the-border support to warring factions in a civil war. In the case of Cyprus, for example, Turkish troops have been stationed in the northern portion under Turkey. The UN has been helpless for over 20 years in this situation, as in the incident of NATO’s assault on Kosovo. Despite its vehement protests NATO, backed by the US, continued with its attack. Such incidents call into question the UN’s relevance and effectiveness in today’s world. But the reason does not lie solely in the UN’s incapacity to deal with this new trend of internal disputes. The UN suffers from a gross lack of funds and absence of a standing force.
In contrast, the UN has been very active and successful on the socio-economic front. It has provided adequate assistance, both financial and otherwise, in several famines and other disaster-affected areas. UN organisations have been very active in controlling diseases and helping the economies of developing countries.
Some of the changes in the world order like the end of cold war have impacted UN to a great extent. It has entirely redefined international politics. One can perhaps for the first time think of a universal world order, with the UN having nearly 200 member nations. The USA has emerged as the dominant military and economic power. The East-West axis has now been replaced by a North-South axis. Within the South itself, sharp economic disparities can be observed. Democratisation, economic liberalisation and market economics have affected political stability and led to turmoil in certain nations. In this new context, it is quite clear that a single nation cannot emerge as a dominant power. The only viable way in which global participation and cooperation can be ensured depends on the emergence of the UN as a truly international body with increased participation of nations from the South.
But why there is a need to revamp the United Nations? The main issue which has prompted the restructuring debate is the permanent membership and the attached veto power. The effective participation of the UN has often been hindered because clashes of interests. This has often led to vetoes being moved by one or more of the five permanent members of the Security Council. These are the USA, China, Russia, France and UK.
Many member nations feel that the Security Council and the United Nations have been reduced to an instrument in service of these five countries, especially the USA. This US-dominance trend has been severely criticised. Precedence awarded to West-dominated issues has resulted in a sense of bias and the very purpose of a “United” Nations has become suspect. Like Germany and Japan, India has also staked a claim to a permanent seat in the Security Council. The claim is based on its regular and large Indian participation in UN operations and on its being a representative from South Asia. India’s large economy also backs its claim.
To a large extent, some of the most developed nations of the world are to be blamed for the ineffectiveness of the UN in dealing with the conflicts. The second biggest threat to world peace comes from the nuclear arsenals of many nations of the world.
Steps for increasing the efficiency of and decreasing corruption in the UN are urgently needed. Simultaneously, steps for nuclear disarmament and participation of third world nations are required. Only then lasting peace can be achieved. Let us remember that the United Nations is still our safest institution and the best arbiter of world peace. *ZZZ*