As the United Nations turns 60 on Oct. 24, it is both reviled and praised. Has it served a useful purpose? This is a valid question. What does the future hold for this organization, which was born in San Francisco with such fanfare and widespread euphoria?
How should we decide whether the world body has thus far been a success or a failure? One rough measure would be to review the purposes for which it was established and to assess its record in these areas. A primary purpose of the United Nations was “to maintain international peace and security” by taking effective measures to prevent threats to the peace and to suppress acts of aggression while striving to settle international disputes by peaceful means.
Granted, in the last 60 years there have been plenty of bloody conflicts. But there has been no world war, and according to a report released Monday at the U.N., global violence has decreased markedly. Professor Andrew Mack at the University of British Columbia, who directed the study, said, “We think the United Nations, despite the many failures, has done in many ways an extraordinary job … very often with inadequate resources, inappropriate mandates, and with horrible politics in the Security Council.”
The study was funded by Canada, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, and Britain.
The report added that since World War II, the average number of battle-deaths per conflict per year, which is the best measure of the deadliness of warfare, has also been falling dramatically. The average war in the worst year, 1950, killed 37,000 people directly. The study shows that by 2002, the number was 600. The report credits the U.N.’s conflict-prevention and peace-building efforts for this development. Professor Mack added that “the current conflict in Iraq is the exception.”
Another original goal of the U.N. was to promote human rights and facilitate “international cooperation” in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character. It will be appropriate to recall that in the pre-U.N. era, a government could mistreat its own citizens with impunity. That was considered its own business, and no one else was allowed to point a finger. How dramatically has the world changed since then!
In earlier years, South Africa’s apartheid regime fell under concerted international pressure led by the U.N., and colonial empires yielded to scores of independent countries in Africa and Asia, again under the U.N. leadership. And the history of the late 20th century is one of inexorable progress toward the protection of human rights. The International Bill of Rights and numerous treaties – including those prohibiting genocide, torture, racial discrimination and discrimination against women; codifying freedom of expression, association and religion; and protecting refugees, minorities and the environment – are shining examples of the emerging consensus in favor of human dignity.
A critic will remark that treaties are not worth the paper they’re written on. Cynicism apart, the fact is that Slobodan Milosevic is in detention in The Hague facing an international tribunal on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity, Saddam Hussein’s trial has begun, and Rwandan leaders tried before another international tribunal, in Arusha, Tanzania, have received life sentences. Several dictators are in exile and oppressors the world over know they can no longer escape international sanctions.
In its Millennium goals, the U.N. accepted the challenge of eradicating poverty and fighting infectious and communicable diseases. The World Health Organization is credited with ridding the world of smallpox, leading the battle against SARS and polio, and now creating worldwide awareness of the threat of the avian flu. Similarly, UNICEF is in the forefront of the effort to improve children’s well-being, as is the World Bank for financing development in the Third World. With 191 countries jealously guarding their sovereignty and without any central legislative, executive or judicial authority, it is a miracle that the United Nations has provided a framework for identifying and addressing global challenges and exploring solutions. It is a promising development that Secretary-General Kofi Annan will be streamlining the U.N. structure and instituting some overdue reforms.
The United States indeed has much to gain from the achievement of these goals. It sounds trite, but the fact remains that if we did not have a United Nations, we would have to create one. Let us strengthen the one we have.
Ved P. Nanda is U.N. Day Chair for Colorado and Thompson G. Marsh Professor of Law and Director of the International Legal Studies Program at the University of Denver.
