On the eve of the UN Day on Friday, October 24, nearly eight decades later, the question lingers: Does the World body still matter? The answer is yes—perhaps now more than ever.
It was established on 24 October 1945, from the ashes of two devastating world wars, to give humanity another chance at peace.
The UN was never designed to be flawless. It was created to prevent the world from collapsing into chaos. In a time defined by wars, disinformation, and political opportunism, the UN remains the only bridge between power and principle, and the only platform where the voiceless can still be heard.
The UN’s founding Charter did something revolutionary. It defined the boundaries of state behaviour and made international law the moral architecture of global politics. Once the Charter was adopted, states were no longer entirely sovereign—they accepted obligations towards peace, human rights, and cooperation. That legal and moral framework matters profoundly in today’s fractured world, where the powerful often act with impunity. Even when states flout these principles, their existence gives the weak a claim and the oppressed a vocabulary for justice.
As former Secretary-General Kofi Annan once said, “We may have different religions, different languages, different coloured skin, but we all belong to one human race.” That shared belonging, enshrined in the Charter, remains the UN’s enduring legacy.
The UN’s universality is its second great strength. With 193 member states, it remains the only truly global institution. No regional alliance, no economic bloc, and no coalition of the willing can match its reach. When conflicts erupt in small, forgotten corners of the world—whether a valley in Kashmir or a village in Africa—the UN provides visibility and legitimacy.
Its debates, reports, and resolutions may seem symbolic, but symbolism matters in international politics. It gives people under occupation or repression a measure of recognition that their suffering is not invisible.
That visibility also creates accountability. A documented violation, a public debate, or a Special Rapporteur’s report transforms local pain into a global issue. For many communities, that alone can make the difference between total silence and a chance at justice.
Moral and Normative Pressure
Beyond diplomacy, the UN creates moral and normative pressure. Peacekeeping operations, human rights mechanisms, and international legal bodies are far from perfect. They are often slow, underfunded, and constrained by political will. Yet they still matter because they set expectations and establish norms of conduct. They ensure that violations of human rights do not pass entirely unnoticed and that victims have channels, however limited, for redress.
Eleanor Roosevelt, who helped draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, once reminded the world: “Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home.” The UN’s human rights system—however bureaucratic—keeps that truth alive.
The UN remains the only international body that upholds the principle of self-determination.
On April 5, 2024, even India recorded support for the principle of the right to self-determination at a UN vote. It voted in favor of a draft resolution in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) reaffirming the "inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination."
Many argue that the UN has failed, but that is only partly true.
In a world where visibility itself is a form of resistance, the UN’s acknowledgement matters. Without it, there would be no legitimate international framework to challenge occupations across the world. There will be no moral foundation for self-determination, and no avenue—however limited—for raising a collective voice.
For those living under military control, the UN represents more than paperwork or resolutions. It symbolises hope, dignity, and the belief that the world still recognises their right to decide their future.
The UN’s critics are also not wrong. The organisation is often paralysed by the politics of its most powerful members. The veto system in the Security Council has too often silenced action, allowing humanitarian disasters to unfold unchecked. Bureaucracy slows decision-making, and funding shortages undermine missions in the field. These are serious flaws that must be confronted.
But to dismiss the UN as irrelevant is to ignore what would happen without it. Without the UN, there would be no international laws against genocide, no coordinated response to refugees, no World Health Organization to guide global health crises, and no climate framework to hold states accountable. Its imperfections are frustrating, but its absence would be catastrophic. As former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said, “The UN is imperfect, but it is indispensable.”
Urgent Need for Reform
If the UN is to matter more in the 21st century, reform is not optional—it is essential. The Security Council reflects the power dynamics of 1945, not 2025. Its composition must expand to include voices from Africa, Latin America, and the Islamic world. The veto system must be re-examined to ensure it does not become a shield for impunity. The General Assembly and human rights bodies must be strengthened to balance the scales of power.
Secretary-General António Guterres recently observed, “The world has changed, but our institutions have not. We need a UN fit for the 21st century.” Reform should not only mean structural adjustments but also a renewed moral commitment—from states and citizens alike—to uphold the Charter’s spirit.
Institutions alone cannot guarantee justice. The UN needs allies outside its glass walls—civil society, academics, journalists, and activists—who refuse to let injustice stand unchallenged. People in conflict zones must use the UN as a tool, not merely as a symbol of hope. We must engage with its processes, demand implementation of its resolutions, and insist that its words translate into real rights.
The UN’s future depends on this partnership between institutions and people. If governments weaken it, citizens must strengthen it. If power tries to silence it, principles must amplify its voice. The UN was born from human determination, and only human will can sustain it.
As the world marks another UN Day on Friday, the choice before us is clear. We can allow cynicism and political fatigue to hollow out the organisation, or we can reinvest in its potential to prevent the next great catastrophe. The challenges we face—climate change, pandemics, forced displacement, and protracted conflicts—do not respect borders or alliances. No state, however powerful, can confront them alone.
The UN’s relevance, therefore, lies not in its perfection but in its persistence. It remains humanity’s best attempt to place moral boundaries around power. It gives the weak a voice, the oppressed a claim, and the powerful a mirror.
The idea of the UN is not finished. It is still unfolding. In the world’s most fragile places—whether Gaza, Sudan, or Kashmir—that unfolding matters most. The question is not whether the UN survives, but what we allow it to become. On this United Nations Day, let us recommit not only to the institution’s vision, but to the change it still promises.
(The writer heads the research and human rights department at the Islamabad-based Kashmir Institute of International Relations (KIIR). She can be reached at mehr_dua@yahoo.com.)
Have you liked the news article?