|
|
 |
|
Feature: |
| |
| You are here:
Home > Features > Canada,
Peacekeeping, and the World Order |
The Future of the United Nations
Is there a future for global government?
The war in Iraq has highlighted the dilemma for the United Nations, as it navigates
a world with one superpower. US President George W. Bush has criticized the UN for becoming
irrelevant, a mere debating club. In some ways, however, the US appears to be one of
the principle thorns in the UN’s side; it is among the most prolific veto-ers of UN
motions, has exempted itself from the International Criminal Court, and of late only
reluctantly pays its UN dues.
During the Cold War, the United Nations served as an important broker between a deeply
polarized bipolar world order. Now, with only one power, and increasingly ‘messy’ conflicts
around the globe, its function has become less clear.
International Community or Global Anarchy?
The United Nations has been seen as a template for an international community and the
cosmopolitan spirit for decades. But as the post-Cold War world has unfolded, the UN’s
position has become more unstable.
Robert Kaplan’s popular book The Coming Anarchy expresses a widely-held fear that the
increasingly interconnected world also means that crime, terrorism, and insecurity are
able to ripple throughout the world with unclear sources. Kaplan’s book prescribes that
the US take control of the United Nations to stop it from floundering in ethical quagmires.
Things have also become difficult for peacekeepers. The question for UN peacekeepers
has become, is it possible to intervene in a situations without legitimate actors?
In fact, peacekeeping is based on the premise that a demilitarized presence will halt
fighting because the two sides wish to stop fighting. However, increasingly conflicts
contain actors (often warlords) who stand to profit from conflict. In such situations,
it is hard to convince the actors to give up their incentives to fight without a more
robust threat of force. Peace enforcing has thereby entered the UN lexicon. But many
submit that it is a slippery slope from peacekeeper to global disciplinarian. It is
vital that the United Nations is seen as even-handed.
|
