2007-10-31 00:40:55 · 18 answers · asked by Awais 2 in Politics & Government ➔ International Organizations
I can't even tell where one ends and the other begins.
Practically they are one.
2007-10-31 09:38:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I like the fact that you used the word "practical" powers. That makes the debate a little more interesting. The US has a gigantic and expensive military. And, even though it is currently fighting a two front war (Afghan and Iraq) it is still not utilizing its full power, hence the excess power is not practical. I think that the US does have more power (overall), but it has a deminished amount of practical power compared to the UN. The UN has many abilities that the US does have, one of them currently being a sense of international legitimacy among the international community (or at least more of it). This legitimacy allows the organization to influence other states through dialogue and negotiations, which is very much more practical than weapons and war. The US, through the State Department and other methods, does have some international clout, but has receded over the past few years due to a lack a legitimacy seen by the international community. Practically, the UN still runs a close race to the US.
2007-10-31 10:12:14 · answer #2 · answered by djturner151 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are correct.The US influence is seen from the very word United in the UN name. Fortuntely or unforunately there is no power comparably even remotely to USA and while to some extent its weightage cannot be avoided, the other members of even the Security Counsil have steadily become only adjuncts. In short the UN is beating its funeral march to the grave like the League of Nations. Now a days the debates there are more or less formal.
The unfortunate fact is that we have such get-togethers only after worldwide conflicts and in such organisations the victor always rules.
2007-10-31 07:56:38 · answer #3 · answered by Prabhakar G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and no.
The UN has little power in the US itself. It can make suggestions on how the USA shoud act, but the USA does not have to listen to them. In addition, the USA has more influence on the actions of other countries than the UN itself has. The only problem is that many countries do not care to listen to the USA (a problem for the USA, not the UN).
But the UN provides aid, both economic and military, more so than the USA does. (Although the USA is the worlds biggest donor of aid, the lions share goes to Israel, the UN gives aid on a more equitable basis based on human need, not political votes.) And so, when it comes to people on the ground, it has more responsibilites, and technically, more power.
2007-11-04 01:55:48 · answer #4 · answered by The Patriot 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
UN is a pawn used by the United States in advancing its interests in other countries.
2007-11-03 05:22:34 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many years ago, when, Jacob Malik, of USSR.was the Chairman of UN Security Council., a member wrongly said,"the US" for 'the UN.' and quickly corrected it. The Russian Chairman smilingly said: "That is alright .Both are the same!"
Now, the US has demonstrated to the world that UN is just a 'robot' of US!
2007-11-01 23:07:03 · answer #6 · answered by The Tribune 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends what you mean by power. Yes US is the bully of the world currently but real power means having influence globally and no the US has lost influence with most countries in the world over the last few years. The UN has remained a rational and powerful institution while the US squandered its influence and made itself a laughing stock to some and a mad tyrant to others.
2007-10-31 07:49:03 · answer #7 · answered by nicelyevolve 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
The UN is an expensive, useless and dysfunctional organization politically. It has never had any "power" as the way it is structured it cannot function effectively, even in the highly unlikely event that most of its members wanted it to.
2007-10-31 18:51:47 · answer #8 · answered by William 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The US, Russia, China, UK, and France have veto power over everything the UN does. That makes any of them more powerful than the UN.
2007-10-31 08:05:21 · answer #9 · answered by Chris 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. UN has become a moot body with no powers of its own. It is practically owned and goverened by US. It as failed in its mission as a neutral body.
2007-11-04 01:42:11 · answer #10 · answered by ? 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely YES!! UN was organised by Americans(and of coarse other countries)...Head Officials of UN are Americans.....US have very strong decision points for every UN steps.....
If you are the supreme power then definitely you are going to set rules...obey rules...decide rules and deny rules in any respect of field...
Remember Chanakya....Chandragupt was the king but Chanakya ruled!!!!!!!!
2007-10-31 08:02:01 · answer #11 · answered by Aditya 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋