...
By Max Drayer
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
This year, at the opening ceremonies for Yale’s annual Model U.N. conference (YMUN), one of the speakers asked the audience a question: Will the U.N. be the solution for global issues for the next generation of political leaders?
The speaker had everyone who said "yes" raise their hands, and most of the audience did. The speaker then asked everyone who thought the answer was "no" to raise their hands. At first, no one did. Then, one hand went up. As I looked out at the speaker, I felt my hand start to go up.
I have spent the past 5 years participating in Model U.N., and have taken part in nearly 25 conferences across a range of countries and topics. After years of debating resolutions in Model U.N., I began to notice the same problems appearing repeatedly: Endless negotiations, unenforceable promises, and deadlock when major powers disagreed. Looking at the actual United Nations, I found many of the same structural flaws.
Read More on Opinion
Most U.N. bodies lack the structural ability to enforce resolutions and decisions. While they are able to vote on resolutions consisting of recommendations, these are nonbinding and cannot be legally enforced. Following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the U.N. adopted resolutions demanding that Russia immediately cease its use of force, and unconditionally withdraw its military forces from Ukraine’s territory. As can be clearly seen from the war entering its fourth year, Russia has continued to violate and ignore this.
...
Additionally, despite having the U.N. Human Rights Council, the U.N. has failed to address some of the greatest violations of human rights across the world.
The council has disproportionately focused on some conflicts, yet has neglected to address others, often failing to pass country-specific condemnations on countries such as China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe, despite well-documented allegations of human rights abuses.
Because membership is determined through political bargaining among member states, governments accused of human rights abuses can use influence over the very U.N. committee tasked with judging those abuses. An institution cannot reliably and consistently hold governments accountable when those same governments help shape its agenda and priorities.
Even with committees with enforcement mechanisms like the Security Council, the U.N. has repeatedly failed to prevent major humanitarian crises. A key example of this is the Rwandan Genocide, where, despite warnings and the presence of U.N. peacekeepers, the organization failed to act decisively, and the final result was 500,000 to 662,000 deaths.
A similar deadlock has occurred in Syria, where repeated attempts to take stronger action against the Assad regime were blocked by Russian and Chinese vetoes. Once again, when a major power had strategic interests at stake, the Security Council found itself unable to act decisively.
The Security Council’s veto power, though, is perhaps the greatest structural flaw in the U.N. Five countries, the U.S., the U.K., France, Russia, and China, each have veto power over any action or resolutions that the U.N. makes. Because of this, as seen once again in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the Syria conflict, the Security Council cannot take action against any of these countries.
In other functions though, the U.N. has achieved meaningful success, most importantly in its humanitarian aid, and serving as a forum for diplomacy. Its humanitarian agencies have provided aid to millions of people, supporting refugees, and coordinating responses to humanitarian crises. In 2023, the U.N. allocated $30.8 billion toward aid, 64 percent of which was channeled directly to U.N. entities so that the U.N. itself could take a central role in providing relief. That year, over 119 million people received food, cash, and voucher assistance, 26.8 million children were given measles vaccines, 23.2 million people accessed a sufficient quantity of safe water, 13.9 million children were given access to education, and 12 million people received protection services. These accomplishments demonstrate the importance of the U.N. to international cooperation.
The way to maximize the impact and efficiency of the U.N. would first be to reform the veto system. Though the countries that currently hold that power would be unlikely to give it up, even attempts to lessen that power would go a long way. As long as the veto power exists, the U.N. will be unable to act decisively against the states that threaten international peace. Next, the U.N. needs to stop placing such an emphasis on writing symbolic resolutions and instead place a larger emphasis on its most effective functions: coordinating multilateral endeavors and supporting humanitarian aid across the globe. This would place an emphasis on the strongest parts of the U.N., while cutting off the inefficient and unnecessary components. The U.N. was designed to maintain international peace and security. Yet its lack of enforcement mechanisms, political constraints, and veto system leaves it incapable of fulfilling that mission when it matters most.
After more than 20 Model U.N. conferences, I have watched thousands of politically engaged students leave believing the United Nations is the primary solution to global conflict. My experience has led me to a different conclusion.
Max Drayer is a high school student, writer, and longtime Model U.N. participant.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines