INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS CIA:

The relevance of the United Nations in the Post Cold War World

"Every year, the United Nations General Assembly votes on a resolution entitled 'Peaceful
resolution of the Palestine conflict.' Every year, the vote is the same. The whole world on one
side - the whole world on one side - and on the other side, the United States, Israel, and
usually Palau, Nauru, Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands and Micronesia."

-Norman Finkelstein

The resolution of the Palestinian conflict has been one of the many issues ,that has been
lying on the highest of world's negotiation tables,since as far 1948,following the creation of
the state of Israel."To save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,which twice in
our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind," says the opening lines of the UN charter.
However, the United Nations and its instruments such as the veto,which were seen as
indispensible components to diffuse events of crisis,have time and again come to display
incompatibility with a world,that is no more just an arena of power struggle between the
American and Soviet blocs. Incessant number of vetoes failing to address crises ,and
negligible adherence to international laws outlining the redundant nature of its institutions,
the United Nations have raised questions, world over with respect to its relevance ,post the
collapse of the Soviet union.

The United Nations was constituted to prevent the world from reverting into war, and to
maintain international peace and diffuse problems between countries in amicable ways. Its
inception was with the idea of resolving conflicts in an equitable and diplomatic manner.
However,the cold war which saw the two major superpowers battling things out on
ideological grounds,revealed the helpless nature of the security council,which was deemed as
the most powerful organ of the UN. The SC became a playground for the major powers to
veto resolutions which were not in their own results,with collecting interest taking the back
seat.The futile nature of the elite mediation table was observable in cases such as the
Vietnam war,with the soviets supporting the communist and the American bloc fighting
against it.By this time around,the international community had started seeing the United
Nations in the light of a puppet dancing whimsically to the two major powers.

However,towards the end of the 1980s with the collapse of the soviet union and hence the
official end of the cold war,there arose a beacon of hope in the United Nations rising to be the
true champion of world peace,as it was deemed to be.This belief was reinforced by the
United Nations' handling of the Gulf war in Kuwait in 1990.Though the UN flags were not
used by the US led coalition against the Iraqi aggression, the victory provided considerable
prestige to the UN and its peacekeeping forces.International observers who confirmed a
paradigm shift in the effectiveness of the UN were however disappointed with the UN being
crippled by many of the new challenges of the new age,which made UN just an inefficient
observer to a large extent.

Many of the problems faced by the UN when it comes to dispute resolution are because of the
structural inadequacies it possesses. The UN ,tailor made to resolve certain kinds of situations
finds itself stranded when it comes to resolution of some issues that are very different from
what its mandate seems to be. The United Nations prior to the 1990s was meant to diffuse
tensions specifically between member nations.Now it saw itself dealing with many intra state
situations of civil strife and war in countries such as Yugoslavia,Georgia,Azerbaijan etc.The
charter had given the UN a mandate to deal with threats to sovereignty in interstate
conflicts,but not intra state ones.The marching of the peace keeping forces in the interior of
the strife torn zones led to the raising of questions on sovereignty and non intervention.The
countries which lent man power to the peace keeping forces were also constantly under
scrutiny with questions about their intention high up in the air.These questions weren't always
without grounding. The UN resolution enabled deployment of forces in certain countries
serve to the deploying countries being drawn into circles of conflict,which aggravates rather
than resolves the conflict.Syria has been an open target for the IS,only because it took
incessant blows from the US coalition aimed at destabilising the Assad regime, on the
question of the possession of nuclear weapons. The Ukrainian crisis remains unresolved
despite UN resolutions issued in the interests of solving the conflict.The traversal of the
world from bipolarity to monopolarity has also led to an increase in unchecked hegemonic
activities by certain nations. Humanitarian intervention is often the term used to disguise
breaches into sovereignty in the name of oil or stabilisation of the Balance Of Power
equilibrium, which the UN cannot do much about, thanks to the power of veto possessed by c
powerful blocs.

The veto ,deemed as an important instrument to thwart attempts at destabilisation of world

peace has led to paralysis in the dispensation of justice. The Palestine question of statehood
remains stalled to this date because of veto exercised by the Israel-American nexus. States,
necessarily independent entities consider their self interest as more superior than the
dispensation of justice. Pakistani terrorists roam free because an Indian attempt at holding the
state of Pakistan accountable has been vetoed in proxy by China. The paralysis that veto
creates discourages country's bid to enter the security council, as no solid change would be
possible.

The nature of international law,out of the book,is that it is equally applicable to

everyone.However,sadly neither does international law,nor the organisations that are engaged
in the enforcement of it taken seriously by countries,when it comes to the UN.Major
countries with powerful military backing always find it easy to impress their will over smaller
ones,despite commitment of grievous crimes. Procedures of law enforcement are extremely
nuanced and complicated which further distances accountability. Israel is not a signatory to
the Rome Statute,which makes it impossible for the UN to hold it accountable for acts of
violence against Palestine,despite the existence of concrete evidence against it.Response to
resolutions have been denied indefinitely and whimsically. Marshall island,a small island in
the pacific has sued India and eight other nations for not sticking to their responsibility of
nuclear disarmament.The filing of responses have been delayed indefinitely,displaying lack
of commitment and regard on the part of the defaulting nations.

This inability to bring action reflects the futility of the UN in catering the needs of the world
today. Unless reforms are implemented at war footing,the United Nations will relapse into the
futility that the League of nations was condemned into. The security council requires major
reshuffles in terms of its membership.The world order of today is hardly reflected in the
Security Council members who represent the victors of the second world war. It also seems
absurd that countries in Europe and Asia decide the destiny of countries say,in Africa.Only
when power is transmitted to more important entities than obsolete ones and adequate world
representation happens, is it that the security council can perform the goals that was bestowed
to it during its inception. The effectiveness of the Veto power,enjoyed by the permanent
members of the SC in itself requires considerable scrutiny. Veto must be used only to
preserve peace and not to strike down a requisite actions by ideologically opposite nations.A
reform that could be proposed is restricting the system of vetoes to issues that gravely
threaten a nations' national interest,introducing a weighted system of voting and hence
,provisions to override a particular nation's veto.The peacekeeping forces are contributed by
nations and are not the united nations standing army.Due to this factor the UN has also
faltered in terms of recruitment of forces in unfavourable locales.The issue of raising the UNs
own indigenous armed forces must be considered,so as to deem real weight to the executive
power of the UN.

All said and done, the UN does play a prominent role in delivering humanitarian aids,catering
to the requirements of women and children stuck in war zones and using inter country
goodwill to forge ties that bind.An international organisation that connects states and plays
the mediators role is definitely necessary,however aspects of its efficiency and the "teeth" it
possesses should be our principle concern.

References

Pax Indica -Shashi tharoor

Submitted by

Mithun P V

1313669

III EPS