Is the United Nations still relevant?

Is the UN still relevant? I'll weigh its current impact against today's global challenges.

The United Nations is still relevant, but its relevance is increasingly contested - the debate in 2025-2026 is whether it is "necessary, but not sufficient."

1. Why the question is being asked now

As the UN entered its 81st year in January 2026, many observers described it as feeling "more like a relic than a powerhouse" and the question "Is the UN still relevant?" was "louder today than ever" as the 81st General Assembly opened in September 2026.

Three factors drive the doubt:

a) Security Council paralysis - the veto problem

The Council's structure has "largely remained unchanged since its inception in 1945" with five permanent members — the United States, Russia, Britain, China, and France — retaining veto power, a system many now characterize as an "outdated relic of the post-World War II era".

Critics describe this as a "permanent oligarchy in which five states — the victors of a conflict that concluded eighty years ago — retain the unilateral power to veto resolutions". Former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned in December 2025 that the repeated use of veto by permanent members "to shield themselves, their allies and their proxies from accountability" is "The Security Council's ongoing failure to properly function", warning that "Without it, the UN risks lurching towards either collapse or irrelevance".

That has led to visible inaction on major wars where a P5 member is party to the conflict - critics note stalemate on Syria, Gaza and Ukraine, and India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has argued the organization has become "largely disconnected from major international decision-making because of persistent deadlock within the UN Security Council."

The International Crisis Group assessment for 2025-2026 summarized: "Struggling to resolve conflicts or help civilians in places from Gaza to Sudan, the institution appears to be losing its relevance".

b) Funding and institutional crisis

The UN is in "trauma" according to Crisis Group: "U.S. funding cuts have hit the UN hard, forcing it into sweeping reductions in staff".

The U.S., the organization's single largest donor, "has cut or frozen large tranches of funding". Under the UN80 reform process marking the 80th anniversary in June 2025, Secretary-General António Guterres promised the UN Secretariat "will shed about a fifth of its staff" and aid agencies such as the World Food Programme, which relied on Washington to cover half its budget, are making even bigger cuts. Analysis noted 2025 was "among the darkest in the history of the United Nations. Gripped by a budgetary crisis and unable to respond to catastrophic wars in Sudan, Ukraine and Gaza".

c) Great-power rivalry

The UN was created to prevent great-power confrontation from escalating, but now confrontation rather than cooperation among major powers defines the Council, citing the war in Ukraine, mass civilian casualties in Gaza and weakening international cooperation.

Analysts argue: "If the U.N. is to survive this year intact, it will need to stop fixating on its own internal reforms and refocus on the core purpose for which it was created: preventing great-power confrontation from escalating into World War III".

2. Why it is still considered relevant

Even critics acknowledge there is no substitute:

> "The question for 2026 isn't whether the UN can survive—it's whether the world still wants it to thrive" and "The UN still coordinates vital work—no other body has its universal legitimacy or reach".

Crisis Group makes the same point: "Despite its many flaws, the UN handles humanitarian and peacekeeping tasks that few other organisations can undertake. It offers a safety net for the vulnerable in numerous war zones and a channel for communication among states" and "The UN system is undoubtedly in crisis, but there is no credible alternative available to handle this range of responsibilities".

Specific functions:

In the United States the picture is more ambivalent: Americans "largely believe the United Nations plays a necessary role in the world, but they remain critical of the organization's effectiveness", with a Gallup poll August 1-20, 2025 finding 32% saying good job vs 63% poor job.

3. Verdict: Relevant but reform-dependent

Most contemporary assessments land on: "So, has the UN outlived its usefulness? The answer is both no, and not quite. The UN at 81 is still necessary, but it is not sufficient".

Supporters argue its universal membership (193 states), legal framework (the Charter), and operational scale for aid, health, refugees, climate and development make it irreplaceable.

Critics argue relevance will depend on reform - especially Security Council reform to reflect today's world rather than 1945, curbing veto use, and making funding more sustainable - and on whether major powers choose to use the UN for deconfliction rather than bypass it with unilateral initiatives.

As one UN University analysis put it: "For 2026, the priority should shift: The U.N. must become less inward-looking and more strategically relevant". Diplomats broadly agree that "potentially acrimonious discussions about the UN's future strategy will have to await the arrival of a new Secretary-General in January 2027".

In short: The UN is still the world's only universal platform for collective legitimacy and large-scale humanitarian action, but without structural reform and sustained great-power engagement, its ability to fulfill its core mandate - maintaining international peace and security - will continue to be questioned.