Evaluate the extent to which the United Nations is in need of comprehensive reform

The United Nations was formed in 1945 to replace the league of nations. However, nowadays it mainly prides itself on its security and peacekeeping, reaffirmation of human rights, and promotion of social progress. This essay will argue that the UN is greatly in need of comprehensive reform.

Some argue that the UN creates a system of collective security, as opposed to the balance of power, and successful peacekeeping through the UN Security Council (UNSC). Under the UN Charter, the security council has the powers to maintain national peace and security by investigating disputes that threaten these values and imposing sanctions against any state found guilty of aggression. For example, after Muammar Gaddafi, former president of Libya, threatened to slaughter the inhabitants of Benghazi, the UNSC voted in favour of military humanitarian intervention in 2011. This shows that it can provide clear global leadership and make quick decisions. By vesting the power of veto into its five permanent members, the UNSC is provided with clarity of leadership. Since its membership is so small, the SC can be quickly convened in response to an international crisis. If it was further enlarged to include more veto-wielding states, it would be even more complicated to decide on military action (dominance principle). Since 1948 the p5 has given permission for 71 peacekeeping operations around the world, there are currently 11 active missions with 85,000 personnel. This shows that the UNSC remains the most important decision-making body in the UN with the power to issue legally binding resolutions, deploy peacekeeping forces and issue sanctions.

However, this argument is weak as the UNSC is simply a tool of the dominant powers (P5) and is subject to great power politics, making its role very weak. The right of the p5 to wield the veto means that decisions to take military action need to be unanimous. Consequently, the Security council has often failed to agree on action because of great power rivalry, not the actual situation. For example, despite over 30 thousand Palestinian deaths since October 2023, the USA continues to block all sanctions and condemnation of the actions taken by Israel in the Gaza strip. This is most likely due to the countries’ broad commercial relationship, with trade totalling $60 billion in 2022. This shows that because of the domination from the US and other great power states, decisions are not made based on the security of civilians but what serves a nation’s best interests, it undermines the principle of sovereign equality between states. Furthermore, the UNSC is extremely out of date in terms of its membership- the p5 represents the balance of world power in 1945 rather than 2024. For example, there are no permanent members for Africa and South America, making 75% of the world's population effectively excluded from the Council. There have been calls to perhaps replace France/UK, countries that are on longer military powerhouses, with growing powers like India. This anachronism means the interests of the emerging world are not sufficiently recognised and therefore the legitimacy of the rulings is undermined.

Therefore, it is clear that the UN is in need of comprehensive reform due to the UNSC’s domination from western powers. This results in its rulings lacking legitimacy and simply being an unrepresentative global body.

It has been stated that the UN has been a successful body because of its role in safeguarding human rights through the UN General Assembly (UNGA). This can be seen in global conferences that have been arranged to address pressing human rights problems and produce declarations. UNGA provides the only truly ‘global forum’ for multinational debate of international issues that represents all 193 members. For example, UNGA set up the 1984 convention against torture. It requires states to take effective measures to prevent torture within their borders and forbids the transportation of citizens to any country where there is reason to believe they will be tortured. This shows that the UN sets agenda over what standards of human rights member states need to implement. Moreover, a further effort has been made by the UN in clarifying when humanitarian intervention is appropriate with the principle of Responsibility to Protect. Signed by over 120 members at the UN summit 2005, it makes sovereignty conditional upon leaders treating their sovereign populations with respect. States never want to restrict their power and thus, are keen to follow the principle.

however, this argument is weak as the UN General Assembly is merely an intergovernmental body which has no binding powers or means of enforcing its decisions to bring transgressors into line. In that sense, the UN was formed by great powers that did not want it to develop the kind of authority which might limit their freedom of manoeuvre in the future. Furthermore, despite the GA being termed ‘the parliament of nations’ it has no real legislative role. For example, the war on terror was not constrained by the UN convention against torture and therefore the USA could act inhumanely towards its prisoners. the key fault line at the world conference on human rights was between western unions who proclaimed a universal meaning to human rights vs. nations who said they needed to be interpreted differently in non-western cultures. They believe attempts to impose a universal definition simply interferes with a country’s internal affairs. This shows that without coherence, UNGA is just a ‘talking shop’ without any consensus. Islamic nations instead signed up the Cairo declaration, and Asian to the Bangkok declaration. Moreover, the idea of R2P is controversial as it makes sovereignty conditional upon a state’s ability/willingness to protect the human rights of its own people. This seemingly contradicts the UN charter that puts sovereignty at its very core.

And thus, we can conclude that the UN is in need of comprehensive reform due to the weaknesses of the UNGA’s legislative capabilities. Without legally binding powers, states are not inclined to follow its rulings, leaving the assembly futile.

The UN has combined its aims of reducing global poverty and protecting the environment into the idea of ‘sustainable development’. This supports economic growth so that developing nations can get richer, but by pursuing methods that curb carbon emissions that contribute to global warming. This task is overseen by ECOSOC. ECOSOC is one of the most representative sectors of the UN, taking its 54 members from all regions of the world and operating through a simple majority. This therefore gives developing countries a say on how aid is targeted to them. Furthermore, it successfully works to help the poorest people, co-ordinating the work of a variety of aid agencies, each with a different focus on development. For example, a major advantage is that it has advanced the principle that development should not be measured simply in monetary terms but tracked by the UN Human Development reports and MDGs (now SDGs). In these ways the UN, despite limited resources, has responded to a growing sense of interdependence and the globalisation of human concerns. The UN also set up the UNFCCC, a mechanism for developing global environmental policy- it provides a pathway for international cooperation. Several Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings, including states and a wide range of non-state actors, have been held. The conferences in Paris 2015 has almost eliminated climate sceptics and every state, developing or developed, is involved in the 5-yearly review process.  This shows that because of the UN, opposing states adopted the first binding climate change deal. Unlike Kyoto, all 195 countries signed the deal and not just the industrialised nations- this proves the element of environmental interdependence.

However, it is often argued that the UN tries to do too much to save the planet, ignoring the other roles of ECOSOC. The council is made up of 54 members elected by the GA, they must oversee the activities of the IMF, WTO, WB, UNICEF, ILO, WHO, and many more. Because of this, many say that it is underfunded, spread too thin and can be accused of cultural imperialism as it seeks to support democratic governance and human rights. For example, the MDGs have failed in many areas, partly because there is just not enough money to commit to developing countries. In Sub-Saharan Africa maternal mortality rates remain stubbornly high and poverty reduction goals were not met. This shows that perhaps, the successes of MDGs are probably more to do with the rise of China and globalisation than any actions the UN took. Generally, the UN and ECOSOC have been criticised because its budgetary position has been based on the ability to pay, creating tension between the global north and south. This may be partly the reason that there is still no fully binding environmental target agreement, even after the Paris Climate Conference. The USA pulled out of the agreement in 2017, seriously harming the possibility of a global solution to climate change. Since re-joining it is in the midst of a superpower ‘cool war’ with China. This shows that a considerable resentment has grown up in the USA, the largest contributor to all the UN’s budgets, possibly due to feeling its donations are undermined. The sheer number of agencies within make it extremely difficult to run efficiently.

For these reasons, the UN clearly requires comprehensive reform because of ECOSOC being pushed utterly past its limits. Consequently, it cannot perform its functions properly and has rendered many missions ineffective.

In conclusion, despite some arguing it is the lead organisation in global governance, we can deduce that the UN is in dure need of comprehensive reform. The UNSC simply serves great power politics, allowing western powers to dominate rulings by exercising the veto when it suits them, because of this their legitimacy has been severely undermined. Furthermore, the concept of sovereignty being at the United Nation’s core is a key issue, its aims and ambitions are large but success stories relatively few; UNGA’s lack of legislative authority means state self-interest will always take priority. Finally, the large number of development agencies that operate in one poor countries also means ECOSOC’s jurisdiction overlaps so much that accountability is blurred and delivery impeded.

Nora