You are here: Home » Politics » The UN: Should It be Disbanded?

The UN: Should It be Disbanded?

The UN has been accused of many things, and it has struggled with many critics since it’s creation. Is it time for the UN to be disbanded? Many people think it should. I will argue the contrary.

Image via Wikipedia

The U.N. should not be disbanded, because it has succeeded in bringing military and civilian aid together, with a very low budget, but it needs to be reformed so that it will have more power. Throughout the years, 1945 to present day, the U.N. has engaged in 63 peacekeeping operations to help countries torn by conflict solve their issues. Since the U.N. was created, 85 countries became independent, Smallpox was eradicated, and millions of people were educated, healed, or protected. The U.N. has been and still is helping millions of people around the world with their humanitarian efforts. They have combined military and civilian forces to achieve great things. The U.N. is involved in an average of 24 peacekeeping operations at any time, and it has a much lower budget then any other similar organization. Although they have done and are doing so many great things, the U.N. need more power to achieve new heights. They need to be respected by all countries, and their sanctions should be feared. Many people argue that the U.N. is worthless, and could easily be replaced, but facts show it is the most efficient and cost effective organization of it’s kind.

The U.N. is very important because to intervene in today’s world you need both civilian and military resources, and you need the experience to handle them. The U.N. was created in 1945. It has been solving conflicts for over 60 years. The longer an organization has been running, the more experiences it had, and the more mistakes it has learned from. Only a few organizations have the power to deploy military forces. This includes the United Nations, the European Union, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the African Union. According to public policy expert James Dobbins from Rand Corporation, when he testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on June 13, 2007, “NATO has the strongest forces, but the United Nations have much more experience.” (Rand website) The U.N. unifies civilian and armed forces in their missions, which gives them a big advantage. With the civilian forces, they can do many things such as deliver food in conflict or war zones, bring medical attention to injured people, or educate people that don’t have the means to pay for an education. Meanwhile their military forces can patrol the area and make sure that the civilian U.N. volunteer’s are safe. For example the U.N. has been delivering food and medical supplies in Darfur, and their armed forces held off the rebels during this time. The U.N. also successfully used both of their forces together during the UNOB (United Nation Operation in Burandi) were they restored peace and national reconciliation.

2
Liked it
User Comments
  1. Brian

    On January 25, 2011 at 9:14 pm


    Haha what a novel article this is! The UN has been successful as much as the league of nations had been all those years ago. Alike the league of Nations the UN had achieved nothing . The UN had failed in Africa in almost every way. It stood along the side lines and watched countless of thousands if not millions of innocent people being murdered, tortured, expelled, ethnically cleansed and starved. Not only in Africa but in the Balkans as well! The UN had let the Srebrenica massacre occur right in front of them and yet did nothing! The UN let Milosevic and the rest of his Serbian nationalist thugs brake every international agreement there was and let them commit genocidal policies in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo.

    It has failed in every way and should get disbanded just like the league of nations.

Post Comment
Powered by Powered by Triond