Almost a quarter of a century ago, when I was a young scientist and government official, my country became a member of the UN. Time flies. At that time, I wrote about the necessary ways of international integration and I was invited to a meeting with the then President of my country E. Shevardnadze. After that I became the first member of the New York Academy of Political Science in the post-Soviet space, because I believed and believe that America bears a huge and very difficult responsibility and costs to support peace and stability in the world.
In my opinion, UN has played no positive role in international relations last decades. "All the steam went to the whistle." The main question is, is it possible at all to reconcile the interests of such a large number of different countries (in terms of economic, military, etc. potentials)? Are claims to world leadership of countries included in the United Nations Security Council in any way substantiated? Is there an alternative to such a world order?
Of course it is nessesary to negotiate, but on the one hand, it is clear that the opinion of Galatia is interest to the Roman Empire very little, but on the other hand, is there a general way to coordinate (except complete subordination) these interests?
In my opinion, UN has played no positive role in international relations last decades. "All the steam went to the whistle." The main question is, is it possible at all to reconcile the interests of such a large number of different countries (in terms of economic, military, etc. potentials)? Are claims to world leadership of countries included in the United Nations Security Council in any way substantiated? Is there an alternative to such a world order?
Of course it is nessesary to negotiate, but on the one hand, it is clear that the opinion of Galatia is interest to the Roman Empire very little, but on the other hand, is there a general way to coordinate (except complete subordination) these interests?
United Nations is too busy with (sponsor nations).... to work effectively......
UN is dedicated to support and protect the interests of friendly sponsor nations at the expense of whole globe!
The United Nations has passed a lot of resolutions since its foundation up to the present, but many of them have been violated by the superpowers.
United Nations simply don't know (pretend) its employer's intentions.....
Rohingya muslims genocide, Bosnian muslims genocide, Afghanistan destruction, Iraq destruction,........UN is striving hard for sustaining world piece!
The United Nations is a global organization with almost all of the world's independent members. The United Nations was founded on 24 November October 1945 in San Francisco, California, USA According to the Dumbarton Oaks Conference held in Washington DC. The Organization is funded through assessed contributions and voluntary contributions from its Member States. Other major offices are located in Geneva, Nairobi and Vienna. Its objectives include the maintenance of international peace and security, the protection of human rights, the provision of humanitarian assistance, the promotion of sustainable development and the strengthening of international law.
I really appreciate these memes and infographics, as they add an additional layer of understanding that enriches this discussion. I have two questions for folks to consider:
1. Would the UN survive without the United States?
2. Is the idea of a global government or an organization designed to facilitate international diplomacy a good idea in theory? In other words, is the UN just doing it wrong or should the entire enterprise be abandoned altogether on the grounds of not being feasible?
Respected all, answers to the questions:
"1. Would the UN survive without the United States?"
Answer: If survival is the key, then 'might is right' attitude can be quite justifiable!
" 2. Is the idea of a global government or an organization designed to facilitate international diplomacy a good idea in theory? In other words, is the UN just doing it wrong or should the entire enterprise be abandoned altogether on the grounds of not being feasible?"
Answer: entire enterprise cannot be abondened, simply, because others (new institution with same slogans of world peace, unity, equality, justice) will be the twin brother of that previous enterprise, only name will be changed; the hierarchy of that global world order to make developing nations live, as the developed nations designed them to live (hunger, povertry, corruption,illeteracy, anarchy, dictatorship serve them better).
Please see my new work about our discussion Book Management is not “Gluttonous Feasts” and Thoughtless “Shock...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking