Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Blog #15: "America's Involvement in the United Nations"

After reading the packet on the United Nations and viewing the documentary, “Broken Promises,” I do believe that the concept of the UN is one that is needed in our world today. However, at its current state, the UN is unacceptable by the standards it is supposed to stand for. The largest issue we have dealt with so far is that concerning what activities dictate UN involvement, specifically genocides and genocide-like activities. In the documentary, the fact was presented that when Saddam Hussein killed 1,000s of his own people, the UN did nothing, and only when he crossed into Kuwait, did they authorize force against his strength. The UN allowed him to kill 1,000s of his own people with mustard gas, without doing a single thing. This is very upsetting to me. I believe that no matter where something happens, it is the international community’s responsibility to react and protect the innocent citizens, regardless of if country lines are crossed. At the same time, I believe it to be the international community’s duty, not the United States’ duty to do this. We are the strongest, most powerful country in the world, but there is a limit to what we can and cannot do. I believe that a better UN could accomplish this, and leave us, as the United States, to focus on the immense pile of problems we face in our own country.

The UN packet we received stated that “in the 185-member UN General Assembly, the United States, with nearly 262 million citizens, has the same vote as Palau, with a population of slightly more than 15,000. One hundred two countries, with a combined population less than that of the United States, compose a 55 percent majority, while 166 nations, which is 90 percent, have a combined gross domestic product that is less than that of the United States.” This means that the small countries can overrule the US in a vote, but the US is still stuck paying for a good deal of it. “The United States picks up a quarter of the UN tab.” This is wrong.

To answer the question of the prompt, I do not believe that the UN, in its current state, is still useful as a world peace-keeping organization. Too many flaws and greedy people are involved to make happen what the UN was originally created for. A reform, whether possible or not, is required if the UN wants to remain in our world in the upcoming fifty years. The article for the “no” side of the argument, stated that “$72.5 million in UN finds for Ethiopia were earmarked not to feed the starving but to embellish conference facilities of the UN’s Economic Commission for Africa.” This is but one example to the greed and corruption present in the UN today.

Obviously there is no “perfect” solution to the UN problem, if there was, we’d already have it in place. As I said earlier, the concept of the United Nations is good, it’s just the actual thing that doesn’t live up to expectation. Major reforms must take place to ensure that people who need help, regardless of their situation, receive it, without all the political confusion that currently exists. We are all humans, and an organization such as what the UN could be, is beneficial to the humane treatment of all.

No comments: