UNO Conception and its Limitation in resolving Global Crises

Muhammad Daim Fazil

Catastrophic World Wars, that exclusively and effectively molded the dynamics of the globe, augmented the necessity of an international forum, institution or authority that could enforce its whim and influence over the illegal invasion or assault by one state on the other. Similarly, the need of a forum or international body was also felt owing to sanction legitimate intervention/attack in a state that need foreign assistance to overcome internal economic/political/military glitches. Consequently, the onerous struggles by Big Powers and ample support form weaker countries resulted in the materialization of United Nations Organizations in 1945. However, the biggest challenge was to make UNO different in nature and wider in scope to League of Nation that was formed after first World War but remained incapable of handling war crisis and equally didn’t become a reason to stop the Big Powers plunging into next World War. Today, when UN has surpassed 69 anniversaries, it has substantially, if not completely, failed to enforce unified and considered law in the world equally. The might of super power remained unimpeded so is their impulse of taking decisions solely. Thus, scenario altered a little despite after half a century has gone past.
Liberalists must have dissimilar view to this notion; believing UN rescued many feeble states and prohibited several illegitimate actions/interventions by a state against the other state. To some extent, they are right. Stopping Iran-Iraq war, facilitating the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan and ending the civil wars in El Salvador and Guatemala are measured as the most successful and timely actions by UN.  These examples add authenticity and validity in liberal view however, the history since 1945 witnessed several unlawful engagements that put question mark on the role, scope, gravity and rationality of UN endeavors. The list of illegal doings by powerful states are innumerable however, ending bigger power’s intervention in domestic issue of a state, unresolved Kashmir and Palestine disputes together with other territorial conflicts, nuclear proliferation and terrorism are the subjects which remained unsettled despite extensive UN sweats and diplomatic efforts to curb them. Therefore, the perception that ‘the power makes its way’ remained largely integral in 21st century.
Critics question the possession and the usage of Veto power that sanctions only five countries in the world to navigate policies, strategies and situations according to their interests. We cannot categorize a single country that holds veto power but it used this clout wisely for the betterment of the planet or for the human kind. Among five veto powers, one may consider China as the most silent and nonviolent country but had it not utilized veto for its personal interests? The answer must be explicit considering the Hong Kong and Chinese Taipei subject. Thus realist perspective regarding power possession and utilization signifies that UN status has been undermined.
Since the twist of Arab Spring has taken place, many states fall into it but clash of political interests and power game by political elites has once more questioned the limited role and scope of UN’s role and charter. Though in most cases, we may calculate Arab Spring and its aftermaths as the internal stuff of the states but the unrest and turmoil that emerged since then (resulted not only in socio-economic disorder but also several thousand innocent lives fall prey to it), should have permission of some legitimate foreign hand to circumvent. Likewise, deepening Syrian crisis and fledgling Iraqi state has manufactured chaos not merely in the region but gradually it is spreading to the other parts of the world, either in shape of global funding or by direct recruitment (it is noted in last few months that Europe, primarily UK is facing increasing sympathies for the militants fighting in Syria and many UK nationals fled to Syria for partaking in jihad). Moreover, only seven weeks of Israeli assaults on Palestinian territory resulted in 2200 Palestinian and 70 Israeli deaths along with 11000 injured but the international forums including UN failed to avert Israeli attacks till both Palestine and Israel reached ceasefire mutually.
All small and big volatile events since 1945 and especially the recent wave of unrest questioned the utility of UNO in trouble times. The forum was aimed to deter crisis and to determine differences through meaningful negotiations but that dream is still a dream. Although UN has exclusive access worldwide through its elite mechanism, it also has mutually binding charter for all the members, yet the overriding of defined laws by influential states make this international institution less pragmatic. There is robust need to draw further red lines by which no country should exceed unless all UN members, or at least General Assembly sanctions it.
The writer can be reached at daimfazil@gmail.com