I am a fan of the United Nations or at least, the concept of it. I believe the idea is good – a majority of the nations of the world coming together to dialogue and trying to forge paths forward for humanity in order to avoid the catastrophic mistakes we have made in the past with the two world wars setting the stage for its formation. The Charter of the United Nations states its purpose to be four-fold. Chapter one outlays the purposes with the following:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
Following this, the principles guiding the member states are outlined:
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII.
The whole Charter of the United Nations is worth reading.
Looking through the purposes and principles, two values become very apparent in the intent of the United Nations. The first is the sovereignty of member states, the second is the equality of all members. To put it succinctly, the UN embodies the idea that no nation is greater than another, that all are equal.
It’s a great idea and the intent should be applauded, but as I have already stated, I believe the United Nations is a comedy (or should it be a tragedy?) of good intention, for there is one governing body written into the charter that completely undermines these very values and the stated purpose and principles – the Security Council.
The power of the Security Council is put forward in this manner in the Charter:
In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its Members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.
Thus the General Assembly hands its greatest power to the Security Council.
The Security Council is made up of five permanent members – The Republic of China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America. These are also the five biggest arms traders in the world and for the most part, formed the largest bloc of allies in WWII – thus the victors of that war also became the most powerful body in the United Nations, which was formed out of that war. In addition to those permanent members, there are ten other rotating seats that are gained through election.
At first glance, the Security Council is not too much of an issue if it truly is governed by the purpose and principles of the Charter and if it truly does act as a representation of the General Assembly. The problem is that there is one aspect of the Council that allows it to do and be everything but what it is intended for. Each of the five permanent members have the power of veto with their vote, for those five members must be in unanimous agreement (or abstain) in order for any motion to be carried through.
Time and time again, each of the member states has, at some point, engaged in voting in a manner that is within their own interests and does not reflect the majority voting of the General Assembly. The permanent members of the Security Council consistently show it to be a body that undermines the General Assembly rather than acting as its representation.
The idea that the most powerful arm of the United Nations would vest veto votes into the hands of five nations completely undermines one of its main driving values – the equality of all member states and thus the Security Council makes the United Nations a comedy of good intentions that can never truly fulfill or live out its stated purpose and principles. The fact that one nation can undermine the wishes of the General Assembly put forward through voting in the Assembly makes the whole thing a sad joke.
The irony is that the majority of the permanent members of the Security Council represent nations that hold democracy to be a sacred political guide, yet within the United Nations they embody anything but democracy, suppressing the evident wishes of the Assembly to suit their own individual agendas.
Until the veto power of the five permanent members is removed and the Security Council is truly charged with representing the wishes of the General Assembly, the United Nations will remain as nothing but an entertaining sideshow.
Related posts:
