Is U.N a failure?

United Nations being a failure or not, is a matter of opinion. The U.N was created to avoid a third world war, and it has fulfilled its duties for 70 years. At times of catastrophes in certain countries, the U.N is expected to intervene and stop the crisis. But we forget that the U.N has a security council, consisting of five nations that are required to maintain peace internationally. Also, these are the only countries that have veto power in the U.N.

Isn't that unfair? That should then answer the question that the U.N isn't a failure. I say this because the security council vetoes most of the orders given by U.N. For example, America was told not to invade Iraq by the U.N, but  went ahead and invaded. As Jeffrey Laurenti noted, "That there has been a global acceptance of the non-admissibility of countries' conquest of others, big fish swallowing up small fish, is a huge advance". 

Weighing up the evidence, I say the U.N isn't a failure. If the security council stops acting in its own interests, the world would be a bit safer.

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/third-rail/articles/2015/9/19/is-the-united-nations-a-failure.html

By Arnold Gatondwe