The UN still runs some important programs such as WWF , Children’s fund, peacekeepers UNESCO sites refugee camps and resettlement programs , vaccine programs. That’s just off the top of my head.
2 Likes
The UNEP is UN, WWF is not. You’ve just helped demonstrate why the UN is kinda useless
As for the rest, of course with all those people and all that money some good things have been done. Palestine is a clear example of the limits of UN usefulness, peacekeepers and refugee care.
As for the WHO, they lost credibility when they bowed to China on covid. Who took over human rights at the UN when Saudi Arabia stepped down? What a joke.
India is the most populous nation in the world, and a nuclear power, but will never be a permanent member of the security council because China will veto.
The place is a mess. The WWF demonstrates how less money could be spent on different places and acheive similar results.
3 Likes
Ah I see.
However the UN does run a lot of important health initiatives worldwide along with refugee programs.
One must ask if they didn’t do it …who would do it ?
Off the top of my head, there is the Red Cross/Crescent, MSF, or Oxfam, that are directly relevant to health care. Plan, Amnesty, Care, are large and tangential. There are a lot of charities and NGOs like the WWF
When a house or car gets so old and rotten it becomes dangerous, sometimes the best thing is to scrap it and get a new one
2 Likes
Lots of good NGOs out there that could run the programs and a lot more efficiently too.
Smaller NGOs would also be easier to hold accountable for things such as rape of minors by their staff.
Refugee programs , peacekeeping, vaccines, not so easy to do.
This one is harder to NGOs, it is true. But again one wonderd if the juice is worth the squeeze. What do they actually do? They haven’t kept much peace in the middle east.
1 Like
Take refugee programs, I guess folks don’t know about the vast camps around the world that the UN run. Seriously who could step into that gap.
Or when there are famines and wars with millions displaced, who has the resources to go in there and deal with it ?
Today, there are 35.3 million refugees globally. UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is mandated to protect 29.4 million of them. A further 5.9 million are supported by the United Nations Relief and Works AgencyLink is external (UNRWA), which was set up in 1949 to care for displaced Palestinians.
I linked again to the first link in this thread. The R in UNRWA is for refugee, so we all know about that one
The UN only has resources because those are donated. The same donors could give to other organizations
I think it’s a necessity to have an organisation that can work across the world’s political blocs and can get their support. So the UN is probably the best we can do right now. I mean does one really think Africa could stand on it’s own two feet in dealing with humanitarian crises, or parts of Asia?
As an example Bangladesh has 860,000 displaced Rohingya people living in Cox’s Bazaar, who would look after them?
Or when there’s a sudden crisis including who could get people on the ground into warzones with enough financial resources into some of these places? I don’t think the Red Cross or these organisations would be able to handle it, they certainly wouldn’t be immune from political interference either.
This is the situation WITH the support of the UN. Who is going to do better though?
’ The 2023 UN Joint Response Plan for the Rohingya humanitarian crisis has received less than one-third of the US$876 million sought in donor contributions. The funding shortfall has led the World Food Programme (WFP) to cut Rohingya food rations by a third since February, down from $12 to only $8 a month, increasing malnutrition, disease, and desperation among refugees. Rohingya and humanitarian workers report that the ration cuts are already having medical and social consequences.’
1 Like
A low bar indeed, and lowered significantly in Gaza.
Yes even with the issues and who is going to do better than the UN in Palestine?
Seriously.
Obviously not Israel.
So then who?
Arab state?
Who will do it?
Anybody who does not employ murderers and those who abet murder. Probably starting with anybody who knows whether it has such people on its payroll. For starters.
1 Like
We are talking about the middle east here, good luck with that.
Well, UNRWA would put its best foot forward if Guterres resigns. I strongly oppose any further US funding unless that happens. Not sufficient, but necessary.
1 Like
The UN security council isn’t exactly made up of benevolent governments
Do the French and British governments employ murderers?
1 Like
French have
2 Likes
I think for a lot of people, we don’t thunk it doesn’t need doing. We just want a regime change 
the UN started back in the day. Something new could start up and hopefully replace the UN in the future.
Getting rid of something without a back up and plan B seems like a dumb idea.
We need a new UN like entity. 2.0. Rebuilt from the ground up.
A League of Nations?
2 Likes
Yes. Redone. From scratch.
There is no issue with the idea of having a UN type of entity. It really is a great thing to have. Now we need a better one that includes all nations and is less corruptible.