Why The UN Can't Get Anything Done

 Why The UN Can't Get Anything Done

By: Abhijay Bhosale

The UN rose out of the ashes of the League of Nations, an organization meant to do what the UN does today. After World War I, nations, many still dealing with the atrocities of the Great War, came together and joined this association. At their height, the League of Nations had 58 member countries with 8 of them being a part of a council. The League of Nations failed because of a lack of structure. Its founding principles were based on a world where everyone would agree to resolve a conflict. It assumed that the world was a utopia where every country’s first thought would be to it out rather than fight. In their defense, WW1 was still fresh in their mind. Anyway, of course, the LofN had measures to ensure these countries wouldn’t fight. They made bold proclamations and said many things. They said how they would sanction the member nations who broke their rules, how they would isolate them, and how their membership would be revoked. But, why did it matter? For one, the League of Nations was made up of just a few strong European nations and a lot of neutral countries. Countries like Russia (at the time, USSR) and the United States weren’t even a part of it. The organization and its council’s decisions had no ground to stand on. They didn’t have a military or any way to strengthen their agreements. It was simply based on that country’s diplomat’s word. So, it fell into disuse. When World War II started, many nations left the order. An example of the League of Nations not being able to back up their demands is when these countries left. If a country left the League of Nations, it would take 2 years for the country to actually not be a part of the organization. In those 2 years, countries were expected to show up to all meetings and discussions. In reality, the countries just left. There was no power within the League of Nations. So, when the United Nations was made, they made it clear that the UN had power. They assembled peacekeeping forces, they made a security council, and they included every world power. By bringing these many forces together in one organization, it created a solid reputation for the UN, but today, there's too much power to actually do anything. The UN can't be like NATO or any other military alliance since there are too many overlapping interests. The organization can't make a decision of that type without discriminating against another country that also holds significant influence. One country leaving is all it takes to start breaking apart the UN. So, the UN limits itself to simply having countries talk about what's happening. Throughout the Russo-Ukranian war and Israeli-Palestinian war, the UN has served as a way to have votes and let countries give their views on what's happening and what they want to do. But since no one's obligated to really do anything the UN says, most of these events are just for show. A country can say whatever it wants in the UN and then do whatever it wants outside of it. There's no real commitment. So, they put out resolutions. These resolutions tell the country what's "right" based on a census, but, again, it doesn't do anything. The UN isn't a platform to get anything done per se, it's just a place to communicate with others. When people argue why we need to have military alliances and fund the military-industrial complex, they have a point, but the solution doesn't lie in the UN, it lies in reforming the way countries interact with one another.