Why the United Nations Security Council Fails

The United Nations is often celebrated as a global institution that is the ideal problem-solver of the world’s many and diverse problems; none arguably more crucial than the sphere of global security. The UN Security Council, the chief decision maker in matters of security, is the one and only global police and army. Many criticize the UN Security Council for its failures to efficiently and effectively act in the face global security issues; may it be in terrorism, mass killings or genocide. These criticisms are legitimate, but they are founded on a romanticised perception of the UN Security Council as a mere functional institution devoid of political interests of the superpower states that comprise it. Decision making in issues of security is highly centralized in the veto five of the UN Security Council, all of which pursue national interests that are often outside the global interest of security. The Rwandan Genocide of 1994 is the most devastating case of realist politics above the liberal interest of global security. The United States, comprising the largest of the UN military arm, ignored calls for action on the basis of their national interest after losing much resources in the intervention in Somalia of 1993. When global interests and the national interest of the veto five do not align, the world must take a back seat and passively witness acts of aggression. Perceptions must change; the ordering principle of global institutions like the UN are not ideal notions of justice and peace, but the interests of superpower states that lead it. The ineffectivity of the UN Security Council is essentially rooted in its centralization of decision making to the few superpowers. To combat this, the UN must develop a more democratized mechanism of decision making where smaller states are given as much influence as the bigger ones. Also, to ensure the compliance of the military arm, significant sanctions must be instituted against its component states who refuse to act in accordance to popularly ratified decisions. Global institutions will never simply be institutions acting based on their assigned function; real politik always triumphs over idealist notions of global justice. Consequently, solutions are not found in technical and functional aspects of the UN Security Council; it lies in the politics and power play of central decision makers. A democratic UN Security Council where every state regardless of size and power is given influence in decision making is the only way that global interests will triumph over selfish national interests. The world simply cannot sit and merely watch another genocide like in Rwanda happen.