Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Success in the United Nations-- What did the UN succeed in/on?
I cant find information on it online.
What did the United Nations succeed in?
I dont need Failures, just success.
Please and thank you! :D
- Professor SteveLv 41 decade agoFavorite Answer
the United Nations has made a major contribution to world peace, although there have been disappointments along the way. The fact is that we did not have a third world war despite the titanic struggle between the free world and the Communist bloc during those years. The fact is that the number of state-to-state conflicts in the last half of the 20th century was half that of the first half without the United Nations.
The process of creating world peace requires cooperative effort. The United Nations is a voluntary association of member states – not a world government, which can readily force cooperation. The 51 original signatories to the United Nations Charter have now grown to 191 members, each having its own economy, language and culture. Given the number and diversity of states, the wonder is not that there have been problems in the peace process but rather that there has been so much success.
The problem is that we tend to remember failures and discount success. We remember Rwanda and forget successful operations in El Salvador, Mozambique and Nambia. We focus on Kosovo, where the U.N. mission met stiff resistance, and forget Cyprus, where the United Nations has preserved the peace since 1964. We remember the disaster in Somalia and forget the mission in Kashmir, where the "blue hats" of the United Nations have played a role in keeping the peace between the nuclear powers of India and Pakistan since 1949. Today, there are 18 peacekeeping missions in the world with more requests for new missions than the United Nations can handle. If U.N. peacekeeping has failed, why does this demand exist?
It is important to remember the context in which the United Nations struggled for peace over the last 60 years. Historians will look at the last half of the 20th century and mark it as the period when the world largely ended more than 300 years of colonial rule. Since the founding of the United Nations in 1945, 80 nations and more than 750 million people were freed from the shackles of colonial oppression and exploitation.
These emerging nations also needed assistance from the world community to survive. The United Nations provided much of that assistance through its specialized agencies and programs. UNICEF, for example, arranged for assistance to hundreds of million of children over the last 60 years. Last year UNICEF gathered more than $700 million in supplies for children; operated safe water and sanitation programs in 90 countries; and served as the principle agency providing aid to the 13 million children in Africa orphaned by the AIDS pandemic. This year it was the agency the world turned to to provide much of the leadership needed to bring aid to victims of the Asian tsunami.
The poor and disadvantaged, however, are not the only beneficiaries of cooperative U.N. action. The U.N.'s World Health Organization is critical to the entire world's "health security." No sensible observer of the international scene discounts the value of its work in the fight to end polio; or deal with the AIDS crisis or the contributions it has made to control diseases such as smallpox and malaria. One only need consider the fact that the deadly SARS epidemic in China has been contained to know the value of this organization.
Or consider the work of the World Bank; the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization to stabilize and improve the world economy to the benefit of everyone. Could we do without any of these agencies, which are part of the U.N. family, or for that matter, could we do without other lesser known agencies. Who would do the work of UNESCO to foster cooperative scientific and cultural programs? Who would provide the cooperative framework for ensuring safe air travel if we did not have the U.N.'s Civil Aviation Agency? Who would do the work of the International Postal Union, which arranges co-operative agreements for international mail delivery? What agency would provide the coordination agreements that put the WW in the World Wide Web if we did not have the International Telecommunications Agency?
We need the United Nations for all of these peacekeeping and humanitarian functions, and we need to be thoughtful about our criticism of the United Nations. Recent questions about the relevance of the United Nations are misguided. The oil-for-food program in Iraq, a focal point of the recent attacks, was a flawed program from its inception. Yet despite its flaws, it worked by keeping U.N. oil trading sanctions in place. It thus prevented Saddam Hussein from fully rearming his military forces; developing weapons of mass destruction and providing significant assistance to terrorists.
- Anonymous5 years ago
I won't say failure yet, actually, they have not been fullyyt efficient. The peacekeeping operations in my lifetime seem to have executed ok (interior the Balkans, etc). even with the undeniable fact that, with concern to human rights, there's a topic. places that are extremely efficient economically get a bypass. as an occasion, China is interior the UN protection Council. they have veto ability. they even have an entire slew of annual Human Rights violations that basically style of pass away. yet actually, what's the alternative? no longer something?