Whats the Role of U.N in the present World

@Furrukh (701)
Pakistan
December 9, 2006 2:19am CST
Well this is a question I think regulates in every persons mind.Is U.N fulfilling its role for which it was craeted.After the 2nd world war it was created to avoid certain conflicts in the future and to be a forum where all the countries cud discuss their problems.Has U.N achieved its objectives if yes than why there are wars in certain part of the worlds?why there are still territories such as Kashmir and Palestine?Why almost 80% of Africa is under the line of poverty? what do u think abt the U.N's role and what sud be done to mke it a functioning body??
24 responses
@smbilalshah (1316)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
i think the UN has been proved to be a very useful and effective organization in terms of trade & economic co-operation btw countries and ofcourse its departments like UNESCO,UNICEF & WHO etc have been of key importance for the ppl living in the 3rd world countries.
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
As a political & a peace keeping organization , well its hasnt been able to do anything that it should be proud of the whole world is full of crissis today like in Kashmir,Palestin,Somalia,Congo & Sudan etc and the only good use for this organization has been for the big powers like the US to get things done their way & legaly like the US invasion of Iaq when the whole world watched quietly. The biggest flaw i think in this organization's system is that it really has no power of its own & ofcourse the VITO system i mean y should some countries have exclusive privelege of denying everything, if so then whats the point of holding voting in the security council when countries like the US just simply VITO everything no matter how logical against countries like Israel..... As long as it remains biased its just a dummy to play for the big powers
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
ofcourse its departments like UNESCO,UNICEF & WHO etc have been of key importance for the ppl living in the 3rd world countries.Your right but i think they are its secondary objectives and the primary objective was to maintain peace what i think that the security council shud be expanded or totally abolish so that voting system shud be started and what the majority makes a decision it shud be implemented
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
yep thats wat i said in my second post acctually i had to break my post into two pieces. I think the fate of this organization will either be like the League of Nations or just turned into a non political firm like i said in the first post of mine
@banta78 (4335)
• India
9 Dec 06
I think United Nations needs to be reorganised and reconstituted to meets the needs of the changed times and era and needs which are vastly different from world war two era. Now that cold war has ended, and there is only one superpower United Nations is the only platform where global voice and concerns can be properly addressed. I think countries like India, Japan, germany, Brazil, south africa should be included in the permanent council so that voices of asian, developing and developed world are integrated. I mentioned these countries especially india because seeing their population size, India has one billion population.Besides performing admirable role in U.N. peacekeeping missions for fifty years by countires like India should be rewarded. I think U.N. should be used to fight global causes like faminine, poverty, global warming, fight against AIDS and other diseases, should play role in peacekeeping missions to maintain peace in the world. The funding of U.N. needs to be made more transparent and should be increased and developed world should be more generous in this regard.
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
well really liked the idea of increasing the funds and to fight against global warming,i think i read some where that america has not agreed till now on lowering its exhausts from the industries,many ppl still thinks that the affects caused by the global warming is far too away but look at the speed at which the antatica is melting,i mean the movie End Of Dayz might realy happen in the real world if sth is not done soon abt global warming
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
there are 56 muslim countries in the world so at least 2 of em should b given this right too....and india? the only admirable work i c india has been doing for past 60 yrs is killing kashmiries and denying the UN resolutions abt kashmir. No nation with such political disputes and with a history of bad relations with every neighbor should b added.Besides im totally against the vito system in the first place, its totally illogical & the basis of inequality among nations
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
def some muslim countires shud be added
• Malaysia
10 Dec 06
HMM.. i think the UN are not doing much around.. also since big countries can VETO the decisions.. so there's not much choice available there.. and what if the country has nuclear power? what can UN do? like the US attacking Iraq.. UN objected but most of UN money comes from the US.. so.. don't think there's any point.. but UN provide world aid.. this part i like about it..
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
yeah the UN has fulfill its secondary objectives but the reason for which its was created,its failing in achieving that
• Malaysia
12 Dec 06
^^;,, er.. god speed america? :D
@ksharma (841)
• India
10 Dec 06
United Nations in my point of view is a puppet in hands of "SOME POWERFULL" nations of the World, it is only active in cases of small & less powerfull nations
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
i think for it to come out of the term puppet the UN really have to have some force over the powerfull countries
@msqtech (15226)
• United States
14 Dec 06
so what happened in Bosnia and Kosovo was not a good thing?
• India
10 Dec 06
point! UN has ne'r been active during hours of crisis.It need more involvemnt like the security council should have countries like India,Brazil,Japan and Germany. There should be more involvement of African countries in decision making processes.Above all US domination has to come to an end.
10 Dec 06
US domination of what? should end?. the only thing US dominates is the amount of countries that their citizens are in trying to help others, without any thanks or help from anyone, grow up people the US is the most diverse country in the world. full of people from somewhere else, who are made welcome to live the dream, while helping those less fortunate than themselves. all this while being attacked from the outside by people who don't know better. look in a mirror before slating a country that holds democracy so high. yes, there are the odd unbalanced few but as a percentage no more than anywhere else. but at least in America you can speak outloud without fear of being hurt for your views
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
well you are somewhat correct but it is also a fact that the former US ambassader to the UN in his early dayz used to claim that as US is the only power of the world only US should be in the security council.wat u have to say about that?with due all respect we are not talking about US here we are talking about UN whether its functioning or not today
• India
9 Dec 06
12 September 2000 SG/SM/7541 ROLE OF UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME MUCH CLEARER NOW, SECERETARY-GENERAL TELLS MINISTERIAL MEETING 20000912 Following is the text of a keynote address by Secretary-General Kofi Annan delivered on 11 September to the Ministerial Meeting on the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which was opened by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic Jan Kavan:] First, let me thank you, Mr. Kavan, for your very kind words, and for the invaluable contribution your country makes to the UNDP in chairing its Executive Board. And then let me thank you all for being here today. This is a busy time of year for all of us. Your presence shows not only that you care about development, but that you care about the role of the United Nations in development. That is as it should be. Development has been one of the main tasks of the United Nations from the very beginning. Even if the Charter did not require us to work for development, I believe we should have no choice, because without development the rest of our mission would be impossible. Without development we can neither prevent conflict nor build peace. Without development, people will not enjoy human rights in any meaningful sense -– which is why we have now come to understand development as being in itself one of those rights. Without development, there will not be justice in the world -– and people without rights will be unlikely to “practise tolerance and live together in peace”. All this is widely understood. What is perhaps more contentious is the United Nations’ active engagement in the day-to-day work of development in individual countries -– which, of course, is what the UNDP is all about. Some people may think that the United Nations should confine itself to defining the norms of development -- or to encouraging and coordinating studies on the theory of development. They may think we should leave the practical side to national governments, to the private sector, and to more specialized and -– dare I say it? -– better funded institutions, such as the World Bank. Certainly we would make a grave mistake if we tried to compete with any of those bodies, or to substitute ourselves for them. But that is not what the UNDP is trying to do. - 2 - Press Release SG/SM/7541 12 September 2000 Until recently, perhaps, we did focus too much on project finance and project management, and sometimes tried to do too much by ourselves. But that has changed. We now have a far clearer idea of our specific role. Indeed, the United Nations Development Programme is going through a process of radical reform. It is not yet complete. Our performance is still uneven. As I travel around the world I meet some resident representatives who are brilliant by any standards, others who are weaker. Almost all of them, whatever their personal qualities, are hampered by lack of resources -- a sad state of affairs, which I hope you will not allow to continue. The strong management which Mark Malloch Brown is now putting in place reflects your wishes. It needs and deserves support from all of us. From now on, the projects we do undertake ourselves will increasingly have a pilot or leverage character -- that is, they will be intended either to try out something new or, by showing what a given approach can achieve, to convince others that it is worth investing in. We will not tell any country that we can solve its problems, or that we ourselves can bring it the resources to lift its people out of poverty. What we aim to do is help countries find their own way of solving their problems, and help them attract, or mobilize, the resources they need. Do countries want that kind of help and advice? Perhaps it is not for me to answer that question, in front of so many ministers from developing countries. You will speak for yourselves. But I can tell you what I have heard in many national capitals -– and what we often hear also in regional and local centres, where the UNDP does much of its most important work. What people tell us is “Yes, that kind of help and advice is precisely what we do want from the UNDP, and we want more of it”. In fact, in many middle-income countries they are prepared to pay for it. In Brazil, for example, most of the money the UNDP is spending comes from the Brazilian taxpayer. The Brazilian federal government, and an increasing number of state governments, use UNDP services because they are good value for money. Perhaps some of you from the North are thinking, “well, that’s fine. If UNDP is so efficient and competitive, why don’t we spin it off in those countries, and let it become a private consultant”. But that is to miss the point. You have to understand what it is that makes UNDP’s services so uniquely valuable. Part of it is that the UNDP is a universal network, present in virtually every developing country. That makes it uniquely well placed to tell people in one country what has worked and what has not worked in another -- what problems are likely to arise if you adopt a particular policy, and how you can get around them. - 3 - Press Release SG/SM/7541 12 September 2000 It can help countries in Latin America hire experts and consultants from South-East Asia, and vice versa. Countries need this kind of help and advice more than ever today, in the age of globalization, when events move very fast, and choices have to be made very quickly. As a leading Asian journalist recently put it, globalization is like an express train. It only stops at those stations where the platform is high enough for passengers to get on. That platform consists of education, of technology -– especially, today, information technology; of infrastructure; and of governance, which is the necessary condition of all those things. I know, you are fed up with hearing that word. I don’t especially like it myself. But what it stands for is vitally important. Good governance comprises the rule of law, effective State institutions, transparency and accountability in the management of public affairs, respect for human rights, and the participation of all citizens in the decisions that affect their lives. People who have that platform to stand on will have a chance to board the train of globalization, and ride it to a better future. Those who do not, will be left behind -- or may even be crushed by the train as it hurtles forward. Building the platform is an awesome responsibility for governments. Many of them feel they are given no choice. In reality there are very important choices to be made, but they need to be informed choices, based on clear analysis. And often they can only be implemented with outside help. And that is where the UNDP comes in, with its expertise and its formidable network of contacts. For instance, it can help countries bridge the “digital divide”, and gain access to the new global economy, by putting them in touch with a range of global partners, both public and private. It is especially well placed to help because it is the heart of the United Nations system. As you know, the UNDP resident representative in each country is also charged with coordinating the work of the local representatives of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the World Food Programme (WFP), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Increasingly, the country offices of all these bodies are housed in the same building -– “UN House” –- just as here in New York they are all represented in the United Nations Development Group, which Mark chairs. This effort to bring greater coherence to the work of the United Nations throughout the world is at the heart of my reform programme. I look to the UNDP to provide leadership and bring all the different agencies together. But not all agencies, funds and programmes are represented in every country. And that makes UNDP’s presence there even more important. - 4 - Press Release SG/SM/7541 12 September 2000 In many countries, the UNDP office is the indispensable point of contact for the whole United Nations system. That is very important for the United Nations -- and, I may say, for me personally. It means I have a representative in almost every country, which is enormously useful. More important, it is greatly valued by the countries themselves. Recently I visited two of the most successful transition countries in central Europe. These countries no longer really qualify for development assistance, but both of them begged me not to let Mark close down the UNDP office in their capitals. I told them I would not dream of interfering in his decisions on such a matter -- especially when I know that funds are very tight. But I must say I rather hope that the UNDP can remain present, even in those countries -- not so much for what it offers them as for what they can offer it. Their experience of navigating the transition from central planning to the market is rich in lessons from which other countries can benefit; and the UNDP is an ideal conduit for passing on such knowledge. The evidence, ladies and gentlemen, is clear. People in developing countries trust the UNDP. Whether it is Mozambicans struggling to resume the path of development after the disastrous setback of the floods earlier this year, or Lebanese seeking to kick-start reconstruction in the south of their country after 22 years of Israeli occupation, they turn to the UNDP to help mobilize world support. In this connection, I was pleased to note that the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations, which reported last month, referred to the UNDP's "untapped potential" in the area of post-conflict peace-building. It said that the UNDP is best placed to take the lead in this area, in cooperation with other United Nations agencies and the World Bank. Indeed, in post-conflict situations t
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
i guess due to the word limit u were unable to complete ur comments
• India
9 Dec 06
hahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
@pagli84 (1850)
• Netherlands
10 Dec 06
i think the UN is a good organization and has good intentions in mind. furthermore, i think it has helped in a lot of situations. however, i think it could do more. i think kofi annan has suggested some reforms to the UN system that could help it a lot. one of my suggestions is that there is a better distribution of power within the body. the 5 veto states have so much power that it's not really fair, because it restricts a lot of other countries from really having a voice. another thing would be to enforce legal documents better. there are a ton of protocols, conventions, treaties, etc. but sometimes violations are just not punished, so there needs to be a stricter system set in place to ensure that violations do not take place and that the violating country will face consequences. also, we recently talked about how disorganized the structure of the systems and bodies is. basically, the UN was created decades ago with i believe 6 main bodies and, since then, smaller sub-bodies have been added but they are not exactly structured properly. what would need to be done is a complete re-structuring of the system as to weed out the useless bodies, join bodies together to make them more useful, and make everything more organized and efficient.
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
uptil now what we have suggested is 1.Restructring of the system 2.Removal of the veto powers 3.more countries should be added 4.the organization needs a stricter system
• India
10 Dec 06
UN can only dominate weaker nations.
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
its a puppetfor the powerful nations
@khysnews (743)
• Indonesia
10 Dec 06
I'm not sure
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
we would really apprecite if u post more than "im not sure"
@superbaaz (133)
• India
10 Dec 06
U.N. is controlled by U.S.A and its partner BRITAIN.so what's the point if it a independent organization.we should invovle more countries to use VETO power to get the desired stability and also should change its head quarters. what do u think?
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
I think you are absolutely right and it should be immediately considered so increase its members using the veto power,what i wud suggest is that a voting system should be involved where all the decision made by the majority should be implemented
@blueman (16516)
• India
9 Dec 06
i think it is good to have an organisation like this to watch over the world, i think their role is somewhat like a teacher.
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
well but the problem here is that if its role isjust like a teachers,than teachers are suppose to guide towards the right path and they have a powering authority on the studends, and not only this the students r suppose to follow waht the teacher tells them
• United States
9 Dec 06
i would say that it is pretty ineffective because most of the countries do whatever they want anyway no matter what the UN says.
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
10 Dec 06
yeah ur right most of the countries do what ever they want to do and when they are in a problem they look forward to getting help from the UN just like USA
• United States
9 Dec 06
the UN is simply a peace keeping unit, sponsored by the different countries of the world. it has no standing army or anything, and its main supporters are the US, UK, France, China, and Russia (the "Big 5" of the Security Council)
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
what do u think abt increasing the number of countries in the security councli,would it be a good thing or a bad thing?
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
U.n HAS ONLY NAME IN OUR PRESENT LIFE AND NOTHING PRACTICAL
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
what should be done to make it practical??
@wasim989 (2303)
• India
9 Dec 06
I think UN is ineffective against strang nation like America and it only targets weak nations like iraq and iran therefore the purpose for which UN was made ha failed.......................
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
yeah ur right i think it shud b united america
@BunGirl (2639)
• United States
9 Dec 06
I think that the UN has been irrelevant and ineffective for quite some time now. In my opinion it is time they either reorganize themselves or disband.
@Furrukh (701)
• Pakistan
9 Dec 06
adding more countries to have a veto power wud be a good idea
@msqtech (15226)
• United States
14 Dec 06
It doesnt do it and I think we need to revamp the whole thing. It should be helping in the world much more and we socalled civilized world should be supporting that effort
@sammy1128 (241)
• China
10 Dec 06
i think the main goal of the UN is to solve the regional conflics .but as you know the UN is controled by big powers such as US, sometimes it is difficult to fullfil its tasks .persian gulf war,iraqy war for instance.
@faheem75 (57)
• India
10 Dec 06
UN has not been much effective in the last couple f years..it think they need to be redirected...n reassembled..n make their aims clear to thm...
10 Dec 06
to be walked all over by idiots. thereby cleaning the boots/Conscious of the walkers. speaking as someone who has UN medals for service, i know how worthless the idea is. that people can sit around a table and sort things out, miles away from the problem, withpout a real clue as to the cause