Is the United Nations still relevant?

Whether the United Nations (UN) is still relevant is one of the most pressing questions in modern geopolitics. The organization faces unprecedented geopolitical divisions, structural paralysis, and a severe financial crisis. Yet, it remains the only universal forum for global diplomacy and a vital humanitarian safety net.

The relevance of the UN is best understood by looking at the arguments for both its decline and its continued necessity.

The Case Against: Why the UN’s Relevance is Declining

Critics argue that the UN is increasingly toothless, structurally outdated, and unable to manage the realities of a multipolar world.

•Security Council Paralysis: The UN Security Council (UNSC) is frequently deadlocked by the veto power of its five permanent members (the P5: the US, UK, France, China, and Russia). This paralysis has rendered the UN unable to stop major conflicts, such as the wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and Myanmar. In 2025, the Security Council adopted just 44 resolutions—the lowest annual figure since the end of the Cold War in 1991.

•An Outdated Post-WWII Structure: The power balance within the UN reflects 1945, not today. Rising global powers like India and Brazil, alongside the entire continent of Africa, have no permanent representation on the Security Council. Critics and member states alike—including UN Secretary-General António Guterres—have called the current configuration a "relic of the colonial era" that lacks modern legitimacy.

•Severe Financial and Political Crises: The UN is facing a major cash shortfall. Following the return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency, Washington significantly cut its contributions, delayed critical budgetary support, and ordered withdrawals from dozens of international organizations and UN agencies. This has forced the UN into a defensive posture; Guterres proposed a 15% cut to the regular budget and the elimination of 2,600 posts.

•The "Toothless" Summit Cycle: High-profile events, such as the 2024 Summit of the Future and its resulting "Pact for the Future," are often criticized as diplomatic theater. While these summits generate long-term goals for AI, space, and international finance, they produce non-binding accords that lack enforcement mechanisms, leading to widening gaps between global ambition and actual progress (such as the lagging 2030 Sustainable Development Goals).

The Case For: Why the UN Remains Indispensable

Despite these severe shortcomings, supporters argue that the UN is irreplaceable. If the organization did not exist, the international community would have to invent it.

•An Unparalleled Humanitarian Lifeline: Away from the political gridlock in New York, the UN's specialized agencies do the critical work of keeping millions of people alive. The World Food Programme (WFP) feeds roughly 150 million people annually, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) protects over 40 million refugees, and UNICEF vaccinates children in nearly every country on Earth. Without these agencies, a sudden global humanitarian collapse would occur.

•A "Concert of Powers" to Prevent World War: The primary mission of the UN has always been to prevent a direct, catastrophic conflict between great powers. In an era of nuclear proliferation and rising tensions, the UN remains the only platform where adversaries (such as the US, China, and Russia) are forced to sit in the same room, maintain lines of communication, and engage in diplomatic deconfliction.

•The Only Venue for Universal Norm-Setting: Global challenges like climate change, artificial intelligence, cyber warfare, and pandemics do not respect national borders. UN-led processes, such as the UNFCCC climate negotiations (including the updating of Nationally Determined Contributions), remain the sole legitimate framework for coordinating binding global targets.

A Critical Turning Point

The United Nations is at a historic crossroads. As António Guterres’s term as Secretary-General comes to an end on December 31, 2026, the incoming leadership will inherit an organization plagued by structural stagnation, deep polarization, and a race against bankruptcy.

The UN may no longer have the authority to act as a global "police officer," but it is still highly relevant as a global safety net and a diplomatic pressure valve. Without it, international relations risk sliding into what former NATO Secretary-General George Robertson described as a lawless "Wild West" of open warfare. To remain effective, however, the UN must look outward and pivot from inward-looking bureaucracy toward meaningful structural reform that reflects today’s multipolar reality.

Citations (9)

1globalaffairs.orgNonprofits and think tanks
globalaffairs.org
Backs: “The organization faces unprecedented geopolitical divisions, structural paralysis, and a severe financial crisis.”
2assodesire.comLow provenance
assodesire.com
Backs: “The organization faces unprecedented geopolitical divisions, structural paralysis, and a severe financial crisis.”
3engelsbergideas.comNonprofits and think tanks
engelsbergideas.com
Backs: “Yet, it remains the only universal forum for global diplomacy and a vital humanitarian safety net.”
4carnegieendowment.orgNonprofits and think tanks
carnegieendowment.org
Backs: “Critics argue that the UN is increasingly toothless, structurally outdated, and unable to manage the realities of a multipolar world.”
5policycenter.maNot yet classified
policycenter.ma
Backs: “Security Council Paralysis: The UN Security Council (UNSC) is frequently deadlocked by the veto power of its five permanent members (the P5: the US, UK, France, China, and Russia). This paralysis has rendered the UN unable to stop major conflicts, such as the wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and Myanmar.”
6unu.eduAcademic
unu.edu
Backs: “Security Council Paralysis: The UN Security Council (UNSC) is frequently deadlocked by the veto power of its five permanent members (the P5: the US, UK, France, China, and Russia). This paralysis has rendered the UN unable to stop major conflicts, such as the wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and Myanmar.”
7youtube.comSocial media and video
youtube.com
Backs: “An Outdated Post-WWII Structure: The power balance within the UN reflects 1945, not today. Rising global powers like India and Brazil, alongside the entire continent of Africa, have no permanent representation on the Security Council.”
8oup.comAcademic
oup.com
Backs: “The "Toothless" Summit Cycle: High-profile events, such as the 2024 Summit of the Future and its resulting "Pact for the Future," are often criticized as diplomatic theater. While these summits generate long-term goals for AI, space, and international finance, they produce non-binding accords that lack enforcement…”
9lowyinstitute.orgNonprofits and think tanks
lowyinstitute.org
Backs: “While these summits generate long-term goals for AI, space, and international finance, they produce non-binding accords that lack enforcement mechanisms, leading to widening gaps between global ambition and actual progress (such as the lagging 2030 Sustainable Development Goals). ---. The Case For: Why the UN Remains…”