United Nations: An Institution in Need of Reforms

The United Nations (UN) was established after World War II on 24 October 1945. UN replaced its predecessor, the League of Nation which was created in 1919 to achieve peace and security. The League of Nations, however, failed to live up to its reputation after the ignition of World War II. The fundamental purpose of the UN was to act as a platform to avoid conflicts by offering substitute options like diplomacy, to undermine the prospects of conflict. The UN Charter, adopted in 1945, set the foundation for this vision, establishing six main bodies, including the General Assembly, Security Council, International Court of Justice (ICJ), Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council and UN Secretariat. At its inception, the UN was joined by 51 states. Today, the UN has 193 member states, and covers the entirety of the globe. Despite this growth, its foundational structures remain largely unchanged, a fact that contributes significantly to its current challenges.

Also See: United Nations Day: Pakistan’s UN Engagement

The Evolution of UN Membership and Budget

In 2024, the General Assembly approved an annual budget of approximately $3.59 billion, funded by contributions from member states. The United States is the largest contributor, followed by China, Japan, and Germany. While this funding supports critical programs and operations, it also showcases the dependence of the UN on a few developed nations. This financial interdependence often undermines the US’s capacity to effectively deal with emerging crises.

The Security Council: Power and Controversy

The Security Council (UNSC) is arguably the most important yet controversial body of the UN.

Tasked with maintaining international peace and security, it has the power to impose sanctions, approve peacekeeping missions, and pass legally binding resolutions. The council comprise of five permanent members, i.e. United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, and France, and ten non-permanent members. Permanent members have veto power. Therefore, they wield disproportionate influence which in several instances has undermined the prospects of mutual collaboration for prevention or resolution of major issues. This veto system has now become a major barrier to effective decision making as veto-powers tend to follow national interests instead of respecting global consensus. Thus, the veto power highlights the disparity within the Security Council, where a single nation can override the collective decision of the rest.

The General Assembly: Equal Representation?

The General Assembly is the primary policy making and representative organ of the UN and has 193 members. The principle of “one state, one vote” in the General Assembly in theory treats all nations on equal grounds. However, the reality is very different. Bigger and developed states exercise significant influence through lobbying and grouping, usually sidelining smaller and developing nations. This imbalance degrades the credibility and proficiency of the General Assembly, where resolutions are non-binding and often symbolic.

Despite all shortcomings, the UN has also achieved noteworthy success. Its specialized agencies, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and International Monetary Fund (IMF), play a crucial part in addressing global challenges ranging from economic crisis to health issues. Moreover, the UN’s peacekeeping missions have also helped stabilize regions like Kosovo and Sierra Leone, but have suffered setbacks in Somalia, Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s.

The successes of the UN are often overshadowed by its failures. The Rwandan genocide, the Syrian civil war, the ongoing conflict in Yemen, humanitarian calamity in Gaza, all expose the UN capacity issues in prevention of these crisis. 

In addition, the U.S. invasion on Iraq in 2003, and Russian invasion on Ukraine in 2021, all represent major failures of the UN. These failures are byproduct of structural problems, lack of enforcement mechanisms, and the prejudiced power of veto in the Security Council.

The Case for UN Reforms

Since the establishment of the UN, global political order has changed significantly. From the bipolar world during the Cold War, to unipolar order after the collapse of the Soviet Union (1991), to the rise of multi-polarity in the contemporary world, the UN functional mechanism has remained the same. Therefore, the UN now struggles to address the challenges of the multipolar world. 

Many regions in the world, like Latin America, Africa, Middle East, and Continent Australia, have no permanent member representative in UNSC. In practice, no new members can be added and no older members can be expelled from UNSC. Similarly, the frequent use of veto, mostly by Moscow and followed by Washington, has undermined legislation and collective action on several issues. 

Numerous calls have been raised to undertake reforms in United Nations functional structure. Proposals vary from expanding the number of permanent members to eliminating the veto altogether. However, undertaking reforms in UNSC is not a simple task. Changes require the approval of two-thirds of the General Assembly and all five permanent members—a near-impossible feat given the vested interests of the veto-power nations. Yet, without necessary reform, the UN faces the existential risk of turning into an obsolete platform with no relevancy. Instead of a global platform, regional platforms will eventually take its place.

The Future of the United Nations

As the world faces new challenges like climate change, the need for a globally collaborative platform has never been greater. The UN must evolve to address realities of the multipolar world and undertake reforms to remain relevant. At its core, the UN’s mission remains as vital as ever: to promote peace, protect human rights, and foster international cooperation. While its structure may be outdated and its processes overcomplicated, the organization still serves as the physical manifestation of global collaboration. Reforming the UN is not just a necessity but an imperative to ensure it can meet the demands of the 21st century.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own. They do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of the South Asia Times.