Since nearly the last World War this world has witnessed, fiftyone countries around the globe joined together as a whole and created a stepping stone in world peace and unity. The United Nations is an intergovernmental organization to promote international co-operation. In addition, it is the only organization of its kind to exist. Together, this bonding organization has a vast variety of usefulness toward all nations involved. Before the United Nations, the relationships between certain counties were more frangible than how it is now.
Nonetheless, the United Nations does bare its own imperfections and thus in this essay| shall convey the issues of the United Nations that are of peacekeeping, the United Nations Security Council, and budget as well as how we, the world, should address them. What in this world offers mankind the love, safety, and unity it longs for? Peace. Peace is arduous to gain and abundantly arduous to maintain. The United Nations “deploys peacekeeping forces to prevent or contain fighting; stabilize post conflict zones; help implement peace accords; and assist democratic transitions” (Renwick).
One of the issues that the United Nations face is the uneven spread of peacemaking across the globe. In addition, experience has shown that forming peace in an area that already has fighting and chaos is substantially more strenuous than maintaining peace in an area where war has been prevented. To work on preventing war and maintaining peace, I propose we use the Development Response to Violent Extremism and Insurgency policy that “is the first of its kind produced by USAID. Its purpose is to provide a policy framework that USAID can use to improve the effectiveness of its development tools in responding to violent extremism and nsurgency, as well as its capacity to interact constructively with its interagency and other partners in these challenging environments” (USAID).
Furthermore, Security Council Resolution 1511, “which summons the international community to help Iraqis rebuild their country and construct a free society after decades of dictatorship” (Holmes), is a second policy that has high potential for success for maintaining peace. Security Council Resolution 1511 not only aids Iraqis, but the United Nations as well. It builds a strong, trustworthy relationship between the United Nations and the Iraqis, which could one day come in handy.
However, one the other hand, while this policy is strengthening the relationship with the Iraqis, other nations, preferably the countries that have a problematic and a distasteful relationship with Iraq, could separate from the United Nations’ goals and target the United Nations, Iraqis, and any other country that supports the policy. The most aspiring thing for me that the United Nations is the “foremost forum to address issues that transcend national boundaries and cannot be resolved by any one country acting alone” (un. rg).
Every country, including the United States of America, has been in dire need of protection and security assistance. The United Nations Security Council was built on the collective security system that is a security arraignment, may it be global, regional, or political, to which every state in the system understands that the security of one is a matter for all and thus commits to a collective response to threats and, of course, breaches of peace (Collective Security).
The issue that the United Nations Security Council faces is that the implementation of collective security has shown to be vexed (Collective Security). For some countries, mainly smaller nations, the United Nations collective security is their only practical means for any security and therefore any flaws in the system are precarious and hazardous. To fix this inauspicious situation, I propose a new foreign policy of my own inauguration.
This recently developed policy advocates that participating nations aligned with the United Nations should ogether create another branch within their militia that is shared and trained jointly. Enforcing such a policy would perhaps result in the dismantling of the United Nations due to that fact that a significant amount of countries would fear the idea of combining their militia with others believing they would be loosing their militia and would not have any military forces to use at their own expense. However, the newly developed foreign policy that is an extension of collective security still allows all participating nations to keep their militia the same except for the addition of a new branch.
The new military branch of all participating militias would be joined together. The leaders of this new militia, the United Nations, would lead this united militia as a democracy. An issue with the budgeting is that France, the United States of America, and Japan are the top financial contributor to the United Nations peacekeeping operations in Africa. Some countries that do not pay as high as the top three countries do, send troops instead. Bring the issue of peacekeeping back onto the table, “Researchers found that peacekeepers failed to protect civilians on several occasions” (Renwick).
For the countries whom funded the annual United Nations peacekeeping budget of nearly $8 billion felt outraged by these findings (Renwick) Meanwhile, troop contribution countries request “raises to the reimbursement rates their soldiers receive for serving in UN missions, rates which had not increased in more than a decade” (Renwick). There should be a progressive budget where each country should pay the proportional amount of currency to each operation they decide on taking on as an organization. The amount should adjust to the size of the country, population, and their GDP.
This paying system would be fair to each country because even though the number of currency being paid by each country is different. The financial weight and strain in each country would weigh the same. In addition to this paying system, deterrence, the policy of making America and its allies (the United Nations) so military strong that their very strength will discourage, or prevent, any attack. In conclusion, in order to have deterrence, the United Nations need to have fair and equal support from all nations involved. To bring this essay to a close, the United Nations is important today as it was when it first was founded.
The United Nations brings forth international peace, cooperation, and development which all are vital aspects in forming and maintaining world peace. It is a dream of mine to one day see this world operate, live, and think as one nation; a federation of Earth. I strongly believe that that goal could not transpire without the United Nations. Collective security, deterrence, and many more foreign policies can bring us all closer to this dream; goal. This trek to world unity, peace, and cooperation will be a laborious one, however, that does not mean it will not be a worthwhile and remarkable either.