Does the United Nations effectively fulfill its mission?
For more information about the United Nations Click here
United States State Department Web Blog Click here
The United Nations Cyber School Bus Click here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Embracing diversity and enhancing global awareness
"Out of many one people"
Embracing diversity and enhancing global awareness
The Office of Multicultural Affairs and Global Awareness
This blog provides the Walker School community with a forum to discuss diversity and global awareness issues while also providing valuable resources to enrich our school community.
Blog Archive
About Me
Our community
9 comments:
No the U.N. does not fulfill its mission. They were created to police the World; to make sure that no nation abuses its power. Had the United Nations carried out its duties, we quite possibly would not be in Iraq. They should have kept Hussein from abusing his power for so long. The fact that Iran is openly working on constructing a nuclear weapon capability is proof that countries are not worried about what the United Nations would think about their actions.
"The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends."
The UN was not created to police the world, but to maintain peaceful relations between countries. This can be difficult at times because when a crisis, usually concerning human rights, occurs, the UN has to involve its members and approach its security council for permission to intervene. This can be tedious and may take time to decide, and in many cases (Rwanda, Mogadishu) this has resulted in no action from the UN due to a reluctance of breaking peaceful links between countries and resorting to force. Even so, since the Cold War there has been a noted 40% drop in violent conflict and an 80% drop in genocide and politicide, which has been suggested to be caused by international activism, which is led by the UN. The UN also has a smaller budget than many governmentally funded armies (to maintain peacekeeping the UN requires only 1/8th of the funding of the US air force) and in some cases, the nations that make up the UN refuse to pay their dues. Even so, the UN manages to carry on and attempts to maintain whatever peace it can. While the UN may not be as efficient or effective as most wish it to be, the situations and circumstances it has to maneuver around are substantial, and I would doubt if there is any other more efficient way to try to bring the world to peace.
Tullika, good comments and you made several very valid points. I don't totally agree with your point that the UN was not created to help police the world and keep nations from abusing its power. After WWII the entire world wanted to make sure that no one like Hitler would ever ravage a nationality or race again. With that being said, I wholeheartedly agree that the UN has taken on many more responsibilities such as you mentioned. Very good dialogue and I feel like I learned a bit from your comment.
I think it is brave to at least make an attempt to bring countries together and try to solve world issues. This could be the first step to a “Utopian world “.However , it is such a broad organization with over 121 countries participating ,which makes it very hard for me to understand the concept of having world peace and an end to war and poverty, etc , etc ,etc. Because of human history, that involved civil wars, conquests, political issues and so many other events that are of human nature, it seems to be almost impossible to reach the ultimate goal of peace and prosperity. Furthermore, the United Nations is taking action and that for me is actually the most important the U.N. can do for right now. The mission of the United Nations is to be a central to global efforts to solve problems that challenge humanity. The United Nations is working on fulfilling its mission .My guess is going to be that the United Nations will never be a 100 % effective, because of all the cultures, and religions that influence the process of solving global issues.
Thank you all for your comments. I hope to see more comments as the debate continues...you may all be interested in reading the book, "The Parliament of Man" (if you have not already, I am currently reading it now) by historian and political commentator Paul Kennedy.
I absolutely think that the United Nations could be more effective in maintaining world order and in the overall fulfillment of its creed. Now a day’s it appears that the members of the UN essentially can choose which ordinances or responsibilities they will follow and which ones they will not, without fear of any consequences. Looking back to the charter of the UN that Tullika has provided us, it appears that one can claim failure in each one of the stated purposes. As it applies to international peace and security the most obvious failure comes in the Iraq war or if we wish to look abroad the Darfur crisis serves as another obvious example where peace and security have not been achieved. Another failure comes in the “relations among nations” segments of the Charter where the world today stands as disunited as it ever has before. One article that I found particularly interesting was Sen. Romney’s call for the United States to cut or postpone the payment of our dues and withdraw financing from the United Nations Human Rights Council calling it a failure. I would suggest that this attitude is not conducive to the beginnings of solving the United Nations problem’s but rather the fundamental concern for hopes reorganization and ultimate success. Until others begin to believe in the reason the organization was started and act in conjunction with those principles, the United Nations will continue to be another failed international organization.
Wow, thanks to you all. I have truly learned a great deal from all of your comments. We will continue the debate throughout this week and into next week. You may want to look at the State Departments web blog at:
http://www.blogs.state.gov/
Yes, we admit, this is where the question of the week originated.
That said, it is interesting to read comments from around the world.
Saludos,
Brad Brown
The signing of the United Nations Charter in 1945 was an unprecendeted development in the history of humankind. For the first time, the world’s most powerful sovereign nation states came together to create an autonomous organization designed to prevent war, to reaffirm faith in fundamental rights, and to promote social progress and better standards of life.
The UN’s effectiveness as a body can be better understood when one has a broader idea of all the commissions, committees, and branches within its system.
The UN has six main operating bodies: the General Assembly, Security Council, Economic and Social Council (UNESCO), Trusteeship Council, the Secretariat, and International Court of Justice. The UN also has many agencies such as the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), United Nations Development Program (UNDP), United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), UNCTAD, UNHCR, HABITAT, UNEP, UNICEF, UNU, UNFPA, UN-ISTRAW, FAO, UNIDO, and so many others.
All these branches support countries around the world in their efforts of reducing poverty, increase equality between genders, improve the quality of life of woman and children, improve the effectiveness of government officials, preserve the environment, prevent and combat epidemics, promote trade and economic development, and ultimately advance human development.
Certainly, the UN’s record is a mixed of successes and failures. This is not surprising, since it is a human-based and fallible organization so dependent upon the whims of powerful national governments and individuals.
Although, the UN still represents man’s best-organized hope to substitute the negotiation table for the battlefield, and to mobilize international resources and cooperation in benefit of many countries around the world.
The UN in theory is an amazing exmaple of the human potential to do good. The idea of creating an international organization with the sole purpose of serving as a liaison/police force is a huge step towards a globally united world. As a human race, we can be proud of the UN as a representative body. However, as we have learned, the universal creed of peace and unity is much harder to enforce, especially when attempting to transgress cultural/ethnic barriers. When dealing with so many diverse, complementing, and often conflicitng cultures, the UN must proceed with caution at all times. Issues are seldom clear cut, as both sides tend to possess valid arguments. I believe that the formation of the UN itself is a great achievement for mankind. It has not been very effective, however, as can be readily seen in issues such as Iraq. I do not blame the organization, though, as the issues are not so easily handled in the first place. The UN can take better steps towards reaching its goals, but it alone cannot lead the world to peaceful coexistence. I think that to achieve such a state, much more global cooperation will be necessary.
Post a Comment