The United Nations this year reached its eighties, and its survival is an active institution until the reach of the hundred, mortgaged by the willingness of the member states and the United Nations system itself to confront difficult facts and engage in fundamental reforms.
The United Nations was born from the ashes of World War II, and its aim was to preserve peace, protect human rights, and unite peoples. But today it is threatened to become a museum entity that fails to keep up with climate shocks, digital divisions, demographic shifts, and increasing geopolitical fragmentation.
As a citizen from Rwanda, I contemplate the United Nations march with mixed feelings. In 1994, during the genocide against Tutsi, the international community, Rwanda, failed through the United Nations. But later, the United Nations helped us rebuild institutions and restore dignity. Today, Rwanda is one of the largest contributors to the United Nations peacekeeping operations. When pluralism works, it makes a real transformation.
But the credibility of the United Nations is eroding. Its response to crises is characterized by uncomfortable consistency: it is fast in some areas, and is indifferent to another. The tragedy of Rwandan societies in the eastern Democratic Congo embodies this disparity is the best embodiment.
The “Banamolini” people, who are CEOGOLON, of Rwandan origin, have been suffering for decades of insecurity, displacement, systematic violence and structural discrimination.
Although their tragedy is well documented in reports of entities such as “The New Humanitarian” and “Genocide Watch”, they do not have any interest in the discussion of the Security Council. This is not just an omission, but rather a structural failure. The strong members of the council protect the status quo, while weak societies are erased from the agenda.
And the question “Does the United Nations fail?” It leads us to a deeper question: What is the United Nations? It is more than just the General Secretariat in New York.
It is a complex system consisting of six main devices, 193 member states, and dozens of agencies. The General Assembly gives legitimacy, but lacks the executive authority. The Security Council is often paralyzed, captive to national interests and geopolitical interactions. The Economic and Social Council is not sufficiently used. The International Court of Justice suffers from selective states in compliance with its rulings, and the Trusteeship Council has become from the past.
It remains only that the General Secretariat is the most active part, although it is not always the most effective, as it restricts the rigid bureaucracy and the limited space of innovation.
However, United Nations employees are not bureaucrats without faces, but rather our citizens, belonging to every country. They work hard within a system slowed by old rules, repeated procedures and institutional lethargy.
The internal interactions often between the General Secretariat, the main purchasing committee, and the multiple layers of review, often lead to delay instead of achievement.
But the problem does not lie in the bureaucracy of the United Nations alone, but also in the behavior of member states. Many of them have turned the United Nations into a tool of its external policies, which selectively use multilateral platforms to serve their narrow agendas.
He deepened the divisions, and led to a state of disappointment in the countries of the south, which have become more aware of this imbalance. But instead of autism, we are still stuck in artificial diodes: north and south, advanced and backward, contrary to the founding vision of the United Nations based on shared responsibility.
Was the United Nations failed caused by its ineffective devices or neglected member states? Answer: Both parties, and none of them, the essence of the problem is the absence of accountability. Accountability must become the foundation stone for united nations ready for the future. The General Secretariat should be held accountable on clear foundations of morals, transparency and efficiency, and senior officials should be evaluated based on the realistic impact, not on internal indicators or political accounts. Leaders who do not achieve the required performance must be replaced and ended the culture of internal protection.
But the burden should not be thrown on the United Nations system alone. Rather, member states must assume their political, financial and moral responsibilities. This includes paying the fully owed financial contributions and time, refraining from interfering in the daily details, and implementing the reforms that they have always called. It also includes enabling the United Nations to innovate and carry calculated risks, rather than punishing it at the first gag.
All six main devices of the United Nations must be subjected to an independent and regular review. No part of this institution should be hidden behind the rituals or bureaucracy. The mystery and immunity – whether in the General Secretariat or within the Security Council – undermine the legitimacy of the organization.
The veto salad of permanent members of the Security Council embodies this imbalance. It was originally created to ensure global stability, but it is used to protect allies or prevent the disclosure of the hallucinative facts. Who will be held accountable for these five? And who guarantees that they act to serve collective security? There is no clear mechanism today. This silence feeds frustration, especially in the areas where the council has left deadly consequences.
In 2024, the “Charter for the Future” provided a promising road map to revive pluralism: digital fairness, climate justice, peacebuilding, youth integration, and the global financial system reform. But the statements are not a reform. Without binding mechanisms, sufficient financing and political will, this charter will join the forgotten promises list.
I have seen what the reforms could achieve when the determination is available. I was part of the 2018 reform process that restructured the United Nations administration and its developmental and security system.
The re -positioning of the United Nations teams in the countries and the establishment of the resident coordinator system showed what can be achieved when the reforms are in line with national priorities and have financial support. But even these gains today are threatened, due to the lack of financing and the decline in political commitment.
We need a new charter based on mutual accountability between the General Secretariat, agencies and member states. A charter demands implementation, rewards the achievement, and is held accountable for failure. We need united nations that are not measured by the number of their reports, but rather the tangible impact on people’s lives.
This is not an invitation to abandon pluralism, but rather to save it and re -conceive it.
This includes the reform of the Security Council, not once it is expanded to include a permanent representation of Africa, but rather by making its methods more transparent and inclusive. It also includes the transition from response to crises to prevention. It also includes a guarantee that digital space governance respects human rights and enables the global south. It includes ensuring sustainable and unconditional financing, so that the United Nations does not remain hostage to the contributions of embezzled and directed that restrict its independence.
There are still bright points, chicks such as UNICEF, the United Nations Development Program, the United Nations Women’s Fund, the United Nations Population Fund, and the International Telecommunication Union, offered models for a united nations centered on man and achieved an impact.
They touch lives, restore dignity, open horizons, but even these agencies need to become more efficient, coordinated and sustainable financing to face today’s challenges.
The celebration of the eighties of the United Nations should not only be a celebration of its survival, but the moment of confrontation. If she does not fix herself, she will not be canceled, but the world will overcome her. The void will fill regional alliances and private networks and technological bodies that are not accountable. This alternative is more dangerous.
This is our organization, and its future is subject to the extent of the member states ready to match their sayings with their actions. Because the world still needs effective and initial united nations, not as Nostalgi’s echoes of ancient peace conferences, but rather as a living engine for justice, fairness and cooperation. If the United Nations aspires to another eighty years, we must return to its foundational goal: neither power, no concession, but man.
The opinions in the article do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al -Jazeera.