|
Advantages
- Liberals might argue that the UN is important as well functioning intergovernmental institutions contribute to the formation of international peace, stability and cooperation.
- The UN has been relatively effective in promoting human rights around the world and at implementing various environmental policies. A major step forward was the 1997 Kyoto protocol, which was the first major example of an international agreement which acknowledged that climate change was happening and that it was highly likely that it was being caused by human CO2 emissions. The protocol set binding targets on signatory states to reduce emissions for the first time in the history of international relations. Furthermore, the 2015 Paris climate change accord was another major step forward, setting binding targets on signatories, however the ultimate effectiveness of this accord was called into question after the withdrawal of the US in June 2017. However these agreements were both landmark steps in progress towards tackling climate change by the international community which could not have been possible without the UN, thus giving weight to the argument that the UN is a highly effective international organisation.
- Regardless of its flaws, the UN is often argued to be an indispensable body. It is essentially undeniable that the world is not a safer and more secure place thanks to the existence of the UN. Since its inception in 1945, the same year after the end of the most devastating and deadly war the world has ever seen, the world has experienced widespread peace among the great powers of the world, and nations that had been destroyed in the second world war have been rebuilt and become strong economic powers on the global stage such as Japan and Germany. The UN will never be able to prevent every single conflict or war, but it provides a valuable frame work for cooperation should the international community choose to use it, and if conflict does break out, the UN will attempt to ensure that it ends quickly through a process of peacemaking and peace-building.
|
Disadvantages
- Realists argue that the UN is ultimately ineffective at challenging the perpetual power struggle between states, as it cannot change the ultimately anarchic system of global politics.
- One of the UN's goals of ensuring collective security is much more difficult to put into practice than it is in theory. For instance, between 1945 and 1990 during the cold war, the UN security council passed a total of 193 vetoes as a result of the mistrust between the USA and the USSR. The UN was unable to prevent the US invasions of Vietnam and Granada, and the USSR invasions of Afghanistan, Hungary and Czechoslovakia. This supported the realist view that the UN was ineffective at preventing conflict and that there is no supranational authority that wields overwhelming power.
- Realists also argue that global bodies such as the UN are normally used by powerful nations to exert their will. The failure to prevent genocide in Rwanda therefore could be seen as an example of the hegemonic powers having little interest in the region. Other conflicts, however, such as the Korean war in the 1950s were backed by the US and the UK, with North Korea being back by the Soviet Union. The UN in this case was arguably effective at restoring peace and security. Therefore it is evident that the UN is ultimately ineffective, supporting the realist view that it cannot transcend the power struggle between states, as conflict is only prevented when it is in the interest of the Hegemonic powers.
- The UN is often thought to lack any specific moral compass. While its goals at the end of WWII were clear after the fight against fascism and the need to protect and preserve human rights, it has now expanded to become a genuinely global body, and has adopted a form of moral relativism in which it tires to be all things to all members. For instance, it allows Saudi Arabia, a country in which women aren't allowed to drive and criminals are beheaded in public, to be head of the UN human rights council. Furthermore, the UN's record of standing up to dictators, condemning human rights violations and preventing genocides is poor. This demonstrates a lack of moral compass within the UN, suggesting that it is an outdated an ineffective organisation.
- ICJ- Pretty much useless, only ever had one conviction.
|
Comments
No comments have yet been made