United Nations: A Critical Analysis 

By Shah Muhammad, Ghotki

United Nations (UN) is a supranational organization which was established on 24 October 1945 in San Francisco, USA. Its main purpose is “to maintain international peace and security.” What is the fundamental structure of UN? How has the UN fared so far in the world? Has it been able to live up to its purpose? Is it really an impartial and effective international body? This article aims to answer these questions in a critical and effective manner. 

Structure of UN

First of all, let us try to understand the structure of UN and how it performs its essential tasks. UN Charter is the legal document that governs all rights and duties of United Nations. Chapter-III of UN Charter mentions principal organs of UN, which are General Assembly (UNGA), Security Council (UNSC), Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council, International Court of Justice (ICJ) and UN Secretariat. Given that only General Assembly, Security Council and ICJ are organs of higher significance, let’s make an attempt to dig deeper into them. 

It is widely known in contemporary times that a national government has a constitution which encapsulates the nation’s ideology. Moreover, there are three principal organs in a national government: legislature, executive and judiciary. Legislature makes the law, executive enforces/implements the law and judiciary interprets the law and constitution. Now the structure of United Nations is somewhat a weak replica of this national structure at international scale. UN Charter is United Nation’s constitution, whereas General Assembly looks like an international legislature, Security Council is the international executive and ICJ is the highest international judicial organ. 

UNSC's Unchecked Authority

However, it is not as simple as it seems. General Assembly is only authorized to hold debates, pass resolutions or make recommendations to Security Council. UN Charter grants no legislative force to the actions of General Assembly. In other words, resolutions passed by General Assembly do not amount to international law; nor can General Assembly exercise check and balance on Security Council unlike a national legislature which keeps check and balance on national executive. Security Council, on the other hand, is the highest executive authority of UN. It is the first and last word on what happens in UN and how it works. Among five permanent and veto-wielding members of Security Council, USA exercises the most influence. International Court of Justice (ICJ) interprets international law and settles disputes among states. Nonetheless, ICJ solely relies on Security Council for enforcement of its verdicts just as a national judiciary relies on national executive for enforcement of its judgements/decisions. 

Furthermore, UN Secretariat is helmed by Secretary-General much like a Prime Minister or President as head of state. But Secretary-General has no real power as he relies excessively on Security Council for directions.

Is UNSC a Dictatorship?

The national courts exercise check and balance on national executive through “judicial review” and regularly hold it accountable. However, UN Charter grants no power of judicial review to ICJ and, hence, the ICJ cannot hold Security Council accountable for its executive actions. If we look closely, the structure of UN looks exactly like a replica of dictatorship at international scale. When a dictatorship is imposed upon a nation, dictator becomes the highest executive, while legislature and judiciary are held subservient and they only work according to the will and pleasure of the dictator. In the same lines, Security Council is the dictatorship wielding world’s highest executive authority, whereas General Assembly and World Court are held subservient and work according to the will and pleasure of Security Council. Neither General Assembly has power to formulate international law, nor ICJ has the power of judicial review.

ICJ's Inherent Weaknesses

Whenever these organs try to be independent, Security Council members suppress them or refuse to enforce their decisions. For example, ICJ ruled in famous Nicaragua vs. US Case (1986) that US had violated international law by supporting the Contras in their rebellion against Nicaragua's government and by mining its harbors, hence making US liable to pay reparations to the aggrieved state. US refused to recognize the authority of ICJ in this case and vetoed down the ruling, refusing to pay reparations to Nicaragua. The question is how could justice be delivered when the very same convicted state is the one which has the predominant power to enforce the ICJ’s verdicts? Additionally, how can any democratic state in the world act independently when a brutal dictatorship is in place at international level? How can a plant of democracy grow under the tree of dictatorship?

UN and Wars

There have been campaigns by international jurists and weaker states to promote General Assembly as a full-fledged international legislature, but Security Council pays no heed and considers it as a challenge to its authority. Whenever US wishes to launch a war, United Nations gives the legal sanction. For example, Korean War (1950-53), Gulf War (1990) and Libya War (2011) were legalized by UN just to appease USA and promote its national interests. Even when UN as a whole or other Security Council members refuse to legalize USA’s war effort, USA bypasses the entire UN body and resorts to unilateralism. For instance, United Nations refused to support Iraq War (2003) but US and UK went forward anyway and toppled the Saddam Hussain’s regime. The then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated in 2004, “Iraq War was illegal and it breached the UN Charter.” Thus, even in the face of such brute force and lawlessness imposed by imperialist powers, UN could not do anything; nor could any organ hold them accountable. In his book, "Perilous Interventions" former indian diplomat Hardeep Singh Puri effectively proves the claim that UN Security Council is very poor in decision-making, and it only serves the interests of its permanent members. The book also reveals that ISIS was a creation of American government.

UN and Capitalism

Moving on, there is another invisible but predominant influence on UN that usually escapes world’s scrutiny: the capitalists. It is a fact that USA is controlled by capitalists (premise 1). It is also a fact that USA exercises direct influence on UN (Premise 2). Hence, it stands to reason that UN is controlled by capitalists (logically deduced premise). Now let’s turn to some empirical evidences. When UN was being founded back in the day, to keep a close watch USA ensured that it would be headquartered in the city of New York. The very same land on which UN’s building is standing today was donated by Rockefeller family, modern era’s biggest capitalist enterprise. Currently, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the second largest funder of the UN health agency Word Health Organisation (WHO), leaving many rich states behind in the funding race. This foundation shapes the entire world health policy of WHO, and Bill Gates is treated as a head of state not only in WHO but also at G20. Needless to say, Gates Foundation is nothing but a noble face of pharmaceutical companies. 

Moreover, there have been many reports of UN Peacekeeping forces deployed in Africa inciting civil unrest and assisting in regime change. In his 2001 book “The Assassination of Lumumba”, Belgian writer Ludo De Witte has decisively proven that these UN forces in Congo worked at the behest of US and Belgium to overthrow Lumumba rather than protecting the peace and legitimacy of its first democratically elected government. Additionally, these forces provide security to multinational companies exploiting and mining mineral reserves of African states, and resort to genocide of local population which often stands up to resist. It leads us to conclude that capitalism, not UN Charter, is the actual constitution of United Nations. 

Conclusion

Just as a society descends into chaos and “law of jungle” when its national system is lopsided in favor of rich and powerful elements, in the same way the world is currently in chaos because international system is lopsided in favor of a few powerful and rich states. How can international law based on justice be enforced when the world’s highest law-enforcement authority, UN Security Council, is rigged in favor of a few big powers? How can international peace and security be maintained in true sense while all the members of Security Council are themselves top exporters of weapons? No doubt UN has rendered some charity services across the world but all that has a minimal effect when the whole international system expands and promotes rich-poor divide; just as the work of NGOs in a society has a minimal impact when the entire national system expands and promotes rich-poor divide. All those weaker states which regularly appeal to UN for justice and resolution of disputes are living in a fool’s paradise. This is a stark international reality to reckon with!