MONTREAL -- The UN is 75 years old this year. Built on the ruins of World War II, the United Nations Charter was drawn up in San Francisco in the spring of 1945.
It came into force on October 24, 1945.
This anniversary calls for the United Nations to reflect on what it has achieved so far, but also to consider its future.
The UN successes in areas such as peacekeeping, improving the world’s health, helping millions of refugees and feeding millions have been numerous.
But its recent failures to bring peace in Syria, Yemen and the controversy on the role of the World Health Organization in the COVID-19 pandemic also brought some doubts on its usefulness.
In 2020, the world is facing major challenges and we live on a very divided planet.
New great powers are emerging and some nations are reconsidering their traditional alliances as multilateralism and globalization are being questioned by certain countries.
Despite all of this, let's ask ourselves this question: What would we do without the UN?
In order to face global threats such as climate change, wars, refugees or a pandemic, we need to act multilaterally.
There are many other multi-state organizations, such as the G7, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), but only the United Nations, with its 193 member states, is truly universal.
The problems facing the world cannot be solved by states individually.
The United Nations has two other fundamental attributes: its legally binding charter and its pre-eminence of peace over the use of force.
These qualities make the UN, even today, after 75 years, the foundation of international order and cooperation. However, in recent years, major conflicts have been bloodying the planet without the UN being able to stop them.
The problem, very often, is disagreement between the five permanent members of the Security Council.
The Security Council is the executive organ of the UN. It is composed of five permanent members, the victors of the Second World War - the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and China - who have a veto, and ten temporary members, elected for two years.
Canada failed recently to obtain one of these seats.
Whenever one of the permanent members of the Security Council feels that its fundamental interests are at stake, it becomes almost impossible to act.
The degree of deadlock in the Security Council has increased sharply in recent years, to the point where there is now a risk that it will be completely paralyzed.
It is clear the Security Council no longer reflects today's world.
The West is over-represented, while the Middle East and Africa have no permanent seats.
Reforming the Security Council is necessary, but unfortunately almost impossible. There were reform efforts a few years ago but without success.
There are major aspirants, such as Germany, Japan and India, but their regional rivals, Italy, South Korea, and Pakistan, want their say too. African countries are also demanding a greater role.
Moreover, being more representative does not mean it will be more effective.
If states are willing to cooperate, the Security Council can be effective; but if politics are extremely divided, as now, then the Council cannot act. Whatever its composition.
Another common criticism of the UN is its cost.
This is especially a Trump administration obsession, but this criticism does not hold water.
The bureaucratic part of the UN is very small and its current operating budget is $5.4 billion. In comparison, the province of Quebec’s budget is $121 billion.
Another example: the UN budget for peacekeeping forces is $6.8 billion. By comparison, the world has spent $2 trillion on military spending!
Peace is much cheaper than war.
UN Organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Food Programme (WFP), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) are doing vital work but you rarely hear much about them, except in times of crisis.
If we want our international institutions to function better, we should give them adequate resources rather than criticize them.
Some recent UN news is encouraging though.
The World Food Programme (WFP) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on October 9, 2020 for its efforts to fight hunger. The UN mediation efforts in Libya have just achieved a permanent ceasefire and hopes for peace in that country are finally justified.
In addition, a treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons was approved by the UN General Assembly in July 2017 with the support of 122 countries will come into force in 3 months. It has now been signed by 84 countries, although without the nuclear powers.
These are just a few and recent examples that prove the usefulness of the United Nations. With more resources and support without constant sniping from governments with their own agendas just imagine what it could do in the next 75 years!
Francois LaRochelle is a former Canadian diplomat. He is a Fellow at the Montreal Institute of International Studies at the Université du Québec à Montréal (UQÀM).
