The Future of the United Nations
For the United Nations, 2018 has already been a year rife with tension. The American president whom nobody predicted, Donald Trump, a huge advocate of an “America First” approach to international relations, has certainly proven to be a challenge for the UN. Trump’s decision to abandon the Iranian nuclear deal on 8th May has shown his disdain for compromise and his ability to threaten international peace, as the consequences of this decision could include the emboldening of hard-line forces in Iran, an increased likelihood of Iranian retaliation against Israel and the encouragement of sectarian conflicts across the Middle East.
Arguably the most significant threat to not only the future of the UN but its credibility as a humanitarian organisation are the shocking actions of its peacekeepers. It was revealed in 2017 that during their mission in Haiti over 100 UN peacekeepers ran a child sex ring for a ten year period and that over the past twelve years there have been over 2,000 allegations of sexual abuse made against the organisation. This calls into question whether the work of the UN truly brings help to countries and communities in crisis and has contributed to a worldwide discussion for the place which aid organisations have in the 21st century. If the UN does not take clear action against perpetrators the organisation’s status will undoubtedly diminish as will its place in solving world conflicts and therefore its aim will be forever comprised and its future will potentially be shortened.
The UN’s future is further threatened by actions of the United States. Donald Trump has thrown many a spanner in the works, demanding major cuts to the peacekeeping budget and withdrawing America from the Human Rights Council, citing his motivations as the need for human rights records of the member states to improve, alongside the UN’s supposedly disproportionate criticism of Israel. But what will the consequences of this be? Back in 2009, Barack Obama stated that his reasoning for participating in the council was that states would be held to the expectation that members “will uphold the highest standards” of human rights. Although the Trump administration may hope that the US’ departure brings about improvements in the organisation and structure of the council, the US is now prevented from having a say in any future human rights judgements, or, indeed, in any potential reforms in the council itself.
The need to strengthen the Paris climate change agreement is one global theme that Secretary-General Antonio Guterres will place great emphasis on, particularly after Trump’s decision to leave the pact, which will become effective in 2020. And Trump’s relationship with the UN may deteriorate even further if Nikki Haley, the current US ambassador to the organisation, decides to stand down and pursue higher office in Washington. Without Nikki Haley as US ambassador to moderate Trump’s more extreme anti-UN policies, Trump may nominate a harder line replacement with serious consequences for the stability of the UN.
However, it is important not to view the future too pessimistically. Despite facing many threats and challenges to its authority and methods to maintain peace, the UN will remain strong and continue to survive. The UN may be an imperfect and fragile organisation, yet the role it continues to play in managing and containing potential crises should not be underestimated, and its influence as a force for peace persists.