Is the United Nations still relevant?

This is a debated question, but I can share perspectives on both sides based on current discussions and events.## Is the UN Still Relevant? A Nuanced Picture

There's no simple yes/no answer—the debate has intensified in 2025-2026, but the evidence points to a mixed reality: the UN retains real functions while facing a genuine crisis.

The Case That It's Struggling

Structural paralysis at the Security Council: The United Nations Security Council faces a deepening crisis of effectiveness and legitimacy, with its structure centered around five permanent members with veto powers increasingly unable to address today's conflicts. In 2025, permanent members cast vetoes blocking action on Gaza and Ukraine, and the Council's permanent members now represent a minority of the world's people.

Financial crisis: The United States owes roughly $1.5 billion in unpaid assessments, arrears that have since climbed above $2 billion, while China has run hundreds of millions behind. Secretary-General António Guterres has warned bluntly of a "race to bankruptcy," proposing a 15 percent cut to the UN's regular budget for 2026 and the elimination of roughly 2,600 posts.

Failure on major conflicts: Gripped by a budgetary crisis and unable to respond to catastrophic wars in Sudan, Ukraine and Gaza, the UN spent much of 2025 focused on internal reform. Critics argue its original mandate—to prevent conflict and uphold justice—has been undermined by power politics, especially the unchecked dominance of the Security Council's permanent members.

Reform concerns: Even the UN80 reform process is drawing skepticism. One critic warned the result could be a UN "that is less effective, and therefore continues to lose relevance."

The Case That It Still Matters

Universal participation as a signal: Despite the criticism, more than 190 member states, with only a few exceptions, sent representatives from across the world to New York City for the UN General Assembly's high-level week, with the vast majority sending heads of state, presidents, or prime ministers. This suggests the sheer popularity of the forum with world leaders is a clear indicator that the United Nations is widely viewed to be politically relevant and an important platform for shaping international discourse.

Continued functional value: Analysts note the UN still retains key functions, remaining an important instrument for at least nominally addressing violent regional conflicts.

Not abandoned even by critics: Notably, even harsh critics in expert debates did not argue for abandoning the United Nations entirely, instead emphasizing the urgent need for reform.

The Real Divide: Symbolic vs. Material Relevance

Perhaps the sharpest framing comes from analysts who distinguish between two types of relevance: when measured by its ability to deliver impactful, material solutions to the most critical global problems, the United Nations' relevance looks far worse, radically diminished by the United States' decision to delay critical budgetary support and cap contributions to UN peacekeeping.

Bottom Line

The UN isn't "irrelevant" in the sense of being ignored—it remains the only truly universal forum for diplomacy, humanitarian coordination, and international law. But its core Cold War-era design (especially the Security Council veto system) increasingly struggles to match today's multipolar world, and chronic underfunding is compounding the problem. As one expert put it, "It's reform or rupture." The question dominating 2026 discourse isn't really whether the UN is relevant, but whether it can reform quickly enough to stay that way—with the incoming Secretary-General selection seen as a major test of that possibility.