1
Midterm #1
Michael Harlow
International Organization
September 19, 2016
Dr. Morales-Ortis
2
The question raised was “Does the United Nations make the world a more peaceful
place?” There are multiple ways to dissect this question, but the main two are what role has it
played in multinational con*icts in the past and does it serve as a system that can be e,ective
going forward. The main issue with the United Nations is the power that 0ve nations have over
the other 188 that are member states. These 0ve, the United States, China, Russia, France and
the United Kingdom have the ability to veto any resolution that does not benefit them. In most
cases, this would seem like a good idea, as it legitimizes the United Nations by giving them a
foundation made up of the 0ve most powerful nations in the world. Without the involvement of
these 0ve nations, the U.N. would revert back to what the League of Nations was, which proved
to be incredibly ine,ective. In an a9empt to avoid any sort of conflict similar to world war 1, the
League of Nations, led by Neville Chamberlin handled Adolf Hitler’s thirst for territory with
appeasement, giving him territories multiple times with the hope that it would help avoid all-
out war. Hitler viewed this policy of appeasement similar to how a shark does a bleeding 0sh
and continued to expand until finally, when the League of Nations would give no more, he
invaded Poland and would go on to conquer almost all of Europe for a short period of time. So
in that respect, having these 0ve nations serve as the head does give the United Nations some
form of legitimacy. Where it can and has gone wrong is when two or more of these nations are
involved on the opposite side of some con*ict, which essentially renders the rest of the
organization useless, as one or both can veto a resolution that would allow the U.N. to get
involved. Throughout the Cold War, the United Nations sat and watched as the United States
and the Soviet Union went back and forth all over the globe, funding wars between nations in
3
an a9empt to spread their brand of political structure to places such as Korea, Vietnam, South
America and the middle east. Throughout the 70’s and 80’s, the United Nations sat on the
sideline and watched as thousands of United States troops *ushed into Vietnam, determined to
get involved in a con*ict we had no business being involved in. In the late 80’s, once again the
United Nation’s hands were tied, as the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, despite
overwhelming opposition from nations all over the globe. In my opinion, it really only appears
that the United Nations is e,ective when each of the Power 5 nations are in agreement on a
resolution. However, when a powerful nation decides it is going to act outside the approval of
the UN’s will, it seems evident that they are similar to a paper tiger than a formidable opponent
strong enough to curb their most powerful members into submission. So to fulfill the
requirement of answering this question, no, I don’t believe the United Nations makes the world
a more peaceful place, at least not when faced with legitimate conflicts between its most
powerful members.
The 0rst point to be made in providing evidence to back my claim that the United
Nations does not make the world a more peaceful place is the organization’s inability to truly
control the actions of its member states, especially those at the top of the totem pole. Over the
course of time since the birth of the United Nations in 1945, there have been many actions
caused by members that the organization spoke out against, yet could do nothing to stop. I’ve
previously mentioned the Soviets in Afghanistan and the United States in Vietnam, but that is
simply the tip of the iceberg when looking at actions that have been categorized as threatening
to world peace. China recently built an island on a reef in the South China Sea, claimed it, and
the islands nearby as their territory, and e,ectively took control over the entire South China
4
Sea. There was outrage in the global community, as members like the United Kingdom and the
United States were clamoring for China to restore that annexed territory back to international
waters. However, China refused to budge, knowing well that because of the economic and
military impact they have globally, that no one would enforce any form of sanction on them.
Another example, in North Korea, where multiple nuclear weapons tests were successfully
completed o, the coast, sending shockwaves throughout the West, who had long sco,ed at the
North’s seemingly daily threats of war. Again, there was outcry, and yet again the United
Nations were leD to do nothing except for hold a proverbial 0nger to the North Korean’s nose in
the hopes that more economic sanctions would impede their pursuit to become a nuclear
power. Once again, it did nothing, and as time goes on, it seems that power of the organization
