The Pros And Cons Of The United Nations

2040 Words 9 Pages
The United Nations (UN) was established in 1945 to promote global peace and international cooperation. It replaced the League of Nations which was deemed as ineffective since it failed to prevent the Second World War. The organization enjoys a membership of 193 nations with the privilege to operate extraterritoriality. The UN also ensures that human rights of member states are not violated in any way. To ensure that the body achieves the task, UN has established a global structure that oversee human rights preservation. Through non-binding declarations and treaties that are legally binding, the UN ensures member states express and demonstrate reasonable efforts in maintaining and upholding human rights . The definition of rights by the UN is …show more content…
Such individuals are often aware of the role of the UN in advocating and demanding that states observe human rights. They rely on the principle of sovereignty to avoid any international intervention. The matter is further complicated by the subjectivity in determining what constitutes human rights violations across different states. According to Donnelly, human rights are “the rights than one has because one is human” . However, the definition does not hold across all societies with some alluding to their religious and cultural beliefs that are superior to the so called human right. The UN Human Rights System supports the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which outlines that all are born free and equal irrespective of their race, sex, religion, language or political and territorial affiliation . The definition captures all aspects of human life that if denied would amount to injustice and hence human rights’ violation. The definition outlined is often inconsistent with sovereignty among most cases of human rights violation that UN is required to …show more content…
In a span of 100 days, Cruden claims that between 500,000-1, 000,000 Rwandans were killed in inter-clan clashes . At the height of the clashes, leading economic powers refused to act and stop the menace with some aiding in the mass killings. The US evacuated its diplomats and avoided any conflict with the natives after paying a huge price when its forces ventured in Somalia. The UN independently intervened to stop the genocide but the support troops were hardly enough to sustain the brutal forces in the clashes. Belgium was forced to withdraw its troops from the UN force in Rwanda due to backlash from other countries. The French government was accused of supporting officials most responsible for the genocide. The Rwandan Genocide serves to highlight the insincerity of UN member states in proclaiming support for human rights. While it is easier to shout from podiums and microphones about the injustice for victims of human right violence, they are apprehensive in intervening into affairs of states accused of violating human rights. UN is left by itself to push for the preservation of human rights: however, such efforts are futile . As earlier indicated, international support is required for UN to prevail upon states abusing human rights to desist the behavior. With lukewarm support for such efforts, the UN always ends up with excuses as to why catastrophes such as the Rwandan Genocide

Related Documents