2008 Woodie Awards
Good in Theory, Not so Good in Practice: the U.N.
Jami Furo
Issue date: 4/21/06 Section: Opinions
The United Nations is about world peace. It is about our optimistic, idealized, naive though beautiful hope that one day there will be peace in our world.
The United Nations is really a noble idea. One hundred ninety-one countries teaming together to discuss diplomatic steps that they can take to ensure this peace.
But how effective is it? How often does peace result because of their actions?
It's important to understand the history. The United Nations was formed to replace the obsolete League of Nations in 1945-coinciding with the United States was entering World War II. The five superpowers of the world at the time (on the Ally side anyway) initiated the formation. These were the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the USSR.
But already we find a flaw. These five "superpowers" established themselves as permanent members of the UN Security Council. But superpowers change as the world's political climate changes. What happens when The USSR crumbles to the ground in the form of a wall in Berlin, leaving the still socially and politically unstable Russian Federation? What happens when it is Japan, our enemy in World War II, becomes an extremely important and prosperous nation in our world? What happens when France is experiencing so much social and political turmoil that for months its capital city burns at the hands of its own people? Only one example, but it displays how the world has changed. As technology has caused "the world to shrink," so to speak, our shrinking world has begun to outgrow the United Nations.
These nations, along with 46 others, drafted a charter to form the United Nations. Their purposes are to "maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among other 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 center for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends." Their purposes are so stated in their charter.
But how to they accomplish their goals? Really, their humanitarian work is quite remarkable, and they must be commended for that. However, what about their goal of keeping peace in the world? How effective is it?
They accomplish their goals by voicing concerns. Obviously, there is no war involved. That would not make any sense. So they voice their concerns to the countries involved. And sometimes, it works. But what are countries like Iraq, Iran, Korea, and others going to do when an organization that was started by and is largely controlled by their enemies going to do? What is their incentive to listen? What good would it do them? In their minds, it would show weakness to back down at the suggestion of those who they want to attack. Is it right? Of course not. But it's reality.
And so, aside from humanitarian works, the United Nations' call for world peace over the past 60 years has remained pretty ineffective. The world is more tempestuous than ever.
The United Nations is really a noble idea. One hundred ninety-one countries teaming together to discuss diplomatic steps that they can take to ensure this peace.
But how effective is it? How often does peace result because of their actions?
It's important to understand the history. The United Nations was formed to replace the obsolete League of Nations in 1945-coinciding with the United States was entering World War II. The five superpowers of the world at the time (on the Ally side anyway) initiated the formation. These were the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the USSR.
But already we find a flaw. These five "superpowers" established themselves as permanent members of the UN Security Council. But superpowers change as the world's political climate changes. What happens when The USSR crumbles to the ground in the form of a wall in Berlin, leaving the still socially and politically unstable Russian Federation? What happens when it is Japan, our enemy in World War II, becomes an extremely important and prosperous nation in our world? What happens when France is experiencing so much social and political turmoil that for months its capital city burns at the hands of its own people? Only one example, but it displays how the world has changed. As technology has caused "the world to shrink," so to speak, our shrinking world has begun to outgrow the United Nations.
These nations, along with 46 others, drafted a charter to form the United Nations. Their purposes are to "maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among other 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 center for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends." Their purposes are so stated in their charter.
But how to they accomplish their goals? Really, their humanitarian work is quite remarkable, and they must be commended for that. However, what about their goal of keeping peace in the world? How effective is it?
They accomplish their goals by voicing concerns. Obviously, there is no war involved. That would not make any sense. So they voice their concerns to the countries involved. And sometimes, it works. But what are countries like Iraq, Iran, Korea, and others going to do when an organization that was started by and is largely controlled by their enemies going to do? What is their incentive to listen? What good would it do them? In their minds, it would show weakness to back down at the suggestion of those who they want to attack. Is it right? Of course not. But it's reality.
And so, aside from humanitarian works, the United Nations' call for world peace over the past 60 years has remained pretty ineffective. The world is more tempestuous than ever.
Be the first to comment on this story