The United Nations (UN), founded in 1945 with the mission of maintaining global peace and preventing future wars, has increasingly been criticized for its inability to prevent conflicts and crises. Despite being the most comprehensive international organization, the UN has struggled to fulfil its objective of ensuring global security, evident from the ongoing wars like the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israel-Palestine crisis. These conflicts not only destabilize regions but also have far-reaching impacts on humanity and the global economy, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of international law and the structure of global governance.
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has exposed a key flaw: the veto power wielded by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC). Russia has used this privilege to block resolutions and efforts aimed at stopping the invasion, making it impossible for the UN to take decisive action. Similarly, the Israel-Palestine conflict has persisted for decades, with the UN unable to mediate an enduring peace or implement resolutions effectively. Political interests of UNSC members, especially the United States, have hindered meaningful intervention, showcasing the limits of the organization.
The UN’s dependence on consensus among powerful nations often leaves it paralyzed during critical moments. This structural weakness erodes the credibility of the institution, leaving global peace at the mercy of political rivalries and self-interest rather than collective responsibility.
Wars have devastating effects on both local populations and the global economy. Civilians endure displacement, loss of life, and psychological trauma, while infrastructure is destroyed, creating long-term hardships. The conflict in Ukraine has triggered a refugee crisis in Europe, while violence in Gaza exacerbates humanitarian challenges in the Middle East.
The UN’s failure to prevent these conflicts has raised questions about the relevance and sanctity of international law. The principle of state sovereignty, which prohibits interference in domestic affairs, has become a double-edged sword. While respecting sovereignty is essential, should the UN have greater authority to intervene when human lives and global stability are at risk?
The debate between municipal law (domestic law) and international law becomes crucial here. Nations prioritize their sovereignty, but in an interconnected world, conflicts spill over national borders and impact the global community. If the UN lacks the power to intervene meaningfully in dangerous situations, it risks becoming irrelevant.
The UN’s inability to manage these conflicts highlights the urgent need for reform. Limiting the veto power of permanent UNSC members or expanding the Council’s representation could enhance its effectiveness. Strengthening mechanisms to hold nations accountable—regardless of their political influence—is also essential to restore trust in international law.
If we do not address these issues now, wars and crises will continue to spiral out of control, threatening both peace and humanity. It is time to rethink the role of the UN and the balance between sovereignty and global responsibility. If not now, then when?
Author is Assistant Professor, HLM Group of Institutions, Ghaziabad
