The practical problems faced by the United Nations
73The United Nations was founded after the Second World War in 1945, after the failure of the League of Nations. The initial objective of the UN was to intervene in conflicts between countries and, consequently, prevent war. Today, the stated aims are to facilitate cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress and human rights issues. To achieve these objectives UN peacekeepers are deployed in various countries to oversee UN operations. However, there are many pragmatic problems associated with this.
Firstly, there is the huge cost of operations involved. Each member country, based on its economic position, is required to disburse an annual sum to fund the UN's global activities. Unfortunately, many governments consider paying UN contributions a very low priority. As there are not enough strident checks on payment and the consequences of non-payment are minimal, many powerful leading nations can delay these contributions. The USA alone owes the United Nations more than $1.3 billion in unpaid dues. The lack of funds means not all peacekeeping operations can be carried out, and existing peacekeeping activities may have to abandoned due to a shortage of supplies, recruits and financial support.
Serious financial problems for the UN started in 1956 during the first major peacekeeping mission in the Sinai. A significant number of states refused to pay for the peacekeeping operation, saying that those responsible should bear the cost. A similar dispute arose in 1960 over the contributions to a peacekeeping initiative in Congo.
Furthermore, recruiting peacekeeping forces can be a problem. Countries already involved in armed conflict may be unable to provide their own forces for UN operations. Pakistan spends around 280 billion rupees of its annual budget on defence, mainly because of poor relations with India. Due to the possibility of attack from its neighbour, as well as the deteriorating law and order situation within the country, Pakistan cannot afford to send a significant number of its militia for UN based activities. Consequently, there are often not enough peacekeepers to successfully carry out a certain mission. For example, in Rwanda only 2500 UN personnel were present in the country during the violent clashes between the Hutu and Tutsi rebels in 1994. As a result, the UN was powerless to prevent the massacre of around one million people.
The UN and its agencies operate on an annual budget of around $10 billion - that is what the world spends on its military every five days. The UN can never provide enough peacekeeping forces to successfully tackle each and every armed conflict around the world; countries spend far more on their own military and defence than the contributions they make to the UN's peacekeeping efforts. In 2003, the US spent $393 billion on its military and owed the UN $1.22 billion in both past and current obligations.
Additionally, opposition to the UN is growing steadily. Many people feel the organisation is ineffective and too bureaucratic. Currently, the Bloomberg administration is working on a proposal to build a UN office tower at Robert Moses Park in New York. Many elected officials, including Assemblyman Dov Hikind of Brooklyn, are vowing to fight this proposal, and say they are prepared to do everything in their power to stop such a plan from gaining approval in Albany if were to come before the Legislature. A majority of the American public also feel this way. They are especially opposed to the USA government bearing most of the cost of this operation.
Consequently, many serious issues can hinder the success of the United Nation's operations around the world.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub









calfcreek says:
4 months ago
The U.N. is powerless to enforce any resolution concerning military operations or violence by any country. It should therefore, rescind all by laws or mission statements concerning such. Then, it could concentrate on things that it is possible to do such as humanitarian and health missions in poor countries. However, if the leadership does not put aside it's extremely liberal political agenda then many capitalist countries are not going to be beating the door down to help them out. Thanks for writing. Interesting read.
Keith