|
The UN is relevant, but not effective.
First, the design of the security council has to go. The veto is what renders the UN useless nowadays. How many times has the whole world come to consensus only to have the US veto the resolution? Also, the security council no longer represents the proper power dynamic in the world today. Germany, Japan, and India would have to be given much more influence.
Abolishing the veto would also hopefuly lead to Secretary Generals being elected who might dare be critical of US policy. Kofi Annan has been really quite tame, whereas Boutros-Ghali spoke out on numerous occasions against the US and was therefore vetoed out of getting another term.
It might also help if the US payed its dues. How many billions of dollars does it owe now? That plus the fact that they're slowly trying to reduce their share of the annual budget.
You can't expect the UN to be effective when it is undermined so often. Also, a lot of changes must be made so power isn't as institutionalized as the Great Powers post WWII intended.
SLM3
|