Does the UN hold any real power?

Question

The UN hotly debates all these resolutions, like getting Iran and North Korea to halt their nuclear programs and such, but seems to make only toothless threats if they are not followed. It seems the UN has little or no enforcing power whatsoever and quite frankly, it seems to me to be nothing more than an illusion presented to less powerful countries to make them think they have serious sway in major world decisions. What do you think?

Answer 1

You are at least partly correct about the military and political role of the U.N. The United Nations has as much power as the members, and the Big Five of the Security Council will give them, in terms of military and political roles in the world. They have had some successes in the last 60 years in peacekeeping in third-world countries, but it is limited, especially where one of the countries with the Veto Power don't want to permit their involvement. This was especially true during the years of the Cold War between the US and the communist countries of the Soviet Union and China. But it did manage to help keep little wars of revolution and independence from escalating into nuclear confrontations in the 50's and 60's, and maintained a stalemate of sorts.

I guess it really depends on how you view the role of the United Nations to begin with. It can definitely have some role in helping negotiations among diplomats representing nations of the world.It is a forum for opinions, a place for quiet diplomacy as well as speech-giving, and propagandizing. This is a part of the UN that is invisible--it is never seen, even heard of, unless there is a treaty that results. It is a place for private, even secret...meetings that are only disclosed occasionally to the world.

They have economic roles in their various agencies and bureaus that control some issues. Their charitable work of UNICEF, the UN Children's organization has bee productive and important; as have agencies like the World Health Organization, which deals with diseases and epidemics that threaten millions of people, and economic agencies like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which is little understood by non-economists, but is important for providing stability and development in world commerce, trade and helping third-world countries. These are not illusory accomplishments. If the UN did not exist, these organizations would have to have been created by other means, anyway.

Answer 2

The UN has done some good things within its limited powers. For example, UN peacekeeping forces are in Lebanon, patroling a 25-mile buffer zone in S. Lebanon to the Israeli border, forces are stationed in the Baltics, in Bosnia to prevent another breakout of ethnic cleansing, & there are still UN troops serving on the DMZ between the two Koreas since no peace treaty has been signed. The UN also has organized aid efforts in many countries after natural disasters. However, because of the framework of the UN Security Council, one veto from the US, Britian, France, China or Russia can kill most resolutions such as harsher boycotts against N. Korea or Iran & they come out watered down & not too affective. Major powers usually ignore the vote of the UN anyway, including the US in its policy with Iraq. The UN has its up's and down's. Overall, I think it is too political & there needs to be more balance & effort to improve areas of the world that needs help or aid.

Answer 3

The UN is made up of its member states -- the countries. So, unless countries actually have the political will to do something, the UN will not have a mandate to do. Reality has it being controlled by the permanent-5 on the Security Council, with the US being one of the big determinants. There have been times where UN troops have been given a chapter 7 mandate allowing them to use force to maintain peace and security -- when troops have had such a mandate, there has usually been more successful peacekeeping. The few countries that actually put troops forward usually restrict mandates to keep their troops from getting hurt.

In talking about the UN, it is important to also see the work that it does outside the political realm -- health, education, etc. Smallpox has been eradicated, villages have access to clean water, millions more children attend schools, elections have been fairly conducted in several countries. It's easy to look at political stalemates but that detracts from a lot of the positive relief and development that the UN shepherds.

What is the alternative? It's the global forum that exists at this level.

Answer 4

The UN is 95% a waste of money and time. It has very little power to get anything done and to make it stick if a vote (which is rare) does occur that outlines a definite program. The UN costs billions and all it does in reality is to give the delegates from all over the world to visit and live in New York with free apartments and lavish dinners and cars that can park anywhere even in places that New Yorkers cannot use. Move them all out and make the UN building a condo on the East river.

Answer 5

Real power? Not really.
At one time the UN was an important and useful tool in the world. It has lost its way and failed. Maybe one day it will get back on the right track. There is no need in "pulling out" of the UN as alot of dittoheads scream. How about working towards fixing it and restoring it to what it once was instead?

Answer 6

I have no use for the UN anymore.

The UN could not enforce even 1 of it's 14 resolutions against Saddam Husein, but whines like babies when the US and it's allies decided to enforce them.

Which countries should have a voice? Are you referring to responsible developed and developing nations like the western allies, Russia, China, India and Pakistan or are you referring to nations like Syria, Iran, and Venezuela?

These things matter, not all nations are equal nor should all nations have their "voices" treated as equal. It's one thing to have a legitimate difference of opinion in how to run your country and your part of the world, it's another to be openly hostile to others without being threatened.

Truly i think the wrong nations have a disproportionately loud voice in the Useless Nations Assembly.

Answer 7

The UN has but one problem. The United States. It does not listen, protects other countries all for its own personal gain. They need to eliminate permanent members and veto power and make revolving security members.

Answer 8

U are absolutely correct and millions in the world think along this line. IThe U.N. t is as good as non-existent since it cannot enforce anything against the will of America. In fact the U.N. is nothing but the U.S.A.

Answer 9

While Veto power is the biggest cause of UN's incompatibility, the UN holds all powers it can hold as long as it is apporved by the Super-Powers particularly the US of A.

Answer 10

They're 100% useless, but you do have to be from a member country to be nominated for an Oscar or Grammy.