Is the United Nations still relevant?

The UN's relevance is debated — I'll survey its current impact and its biggest criticisms to give you a balanced answer.

The United Nations is still relevant, but its relevance is contested and depends on how relevance is defined - as a forum vs. as an effective enforcer of peace and security. On its 80th anniversary in 2025, the debate is whether it can remain a vital stage for diplomacy or will be sidelined by great-power rivalry.

Why the UN Is Still Considered Relevant

1. Convening power and legitimacy:
It is easy to dismiss the UN, but its more than 190 member states, with only a few exceptions, still send heads of state, presidents or prime ministers to New York for the General Assembly. The UN provides that platform and the convening power to bring stakeholders together to help address specific issues, and without it countries would have nowhere to turn to advance their agenda.

> "The price we pay for UNGA is the price we pay for peace. For as long as we keep the conversation going, peace will be there."

The General Assembly is fulfilling that purpose — the United Nations is still relevant for not shying away from hard topics.

Despite US scepticism, the UN's image around the world remains favorable. Most publics in the 25-nation 2025 Pew Global Attitudes Survey hold net-positive views, and several nations — such as South Africa, Nigeria, and Germany — have seen favorable views rise. That perception makes the UN a still-useful venue for international contestation.

The General Assembly heard that the UN, notwithstanding its inadequacies and failures, was an indispensable "family of nations" that had nurtured countries in search of equality, peace and prosperity.

2. Humanitarian, development and normative work:

An enduring achievement is still being here and relevant for 193 countries today and leaving no one behind, especially in conflict and humanitarian issues, through peacekeeping operations, providing the platform for negotiation and peaceful resolution of conflicts.

Its achievements span peace, health, human rights and development, including over 70 peacekeeping missions since 1948. Today peacekeeping missions remain a cornerstone of international efforts to promote security and stability — monitoring ceasefire agreements, protecting civilians, facilitating humanitarian aid, and supporting political processes.

Other core functions often cited:

A separate assessment called the UN "still one of the world's most important — and surprisingly impactful — institutions" and answered "Is the United Nations still relevant today? Spoiler: Yes."

Why Its Relevance Is Questioned

1. Security Council paralysis:

The most frequent criticism is directed at the Security Council. Its structure still reflects the world of 1945. The United States, Russia, China, Britain and France retain permanent membership and veto power, and those five states still possess the ability to prevent substantive Council action even when most other members support it.

The UN is going through a historically critical phase, as a new era of great-power rivalry undermines its authority. Paralyzed by the veto rights of the major powers in conflicts such as those in Ukraine and Gaza, the Security Council is degenerating into an echo chamber of international crises.

Analysts note the paradox that two of the main perpetrators of global threat and instability, Russia and China, are still two of the permanent members who regularly veto Security Council proposals.

Critics argue legitimacy has been irretrievably compromised because Russia has violated the sovereignty of Ukraine, China has refused to condemn it, and the United States is seen to have provided seemingly unconditional support for Israel's actions in Gaza. Former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned the Security Council's ongoing failure to properly function constitutes the most egregious cause, highlighting repeated use of veto by permanent members "to shield themselves, their allies and their proxies from accountability."

Without meaningful reform, civilians will remain unprotected and impunity will persist.

2. Financial and political retrenchment:

When measured by its ability to deliver impactful, material solutions, the UN's relevance looks far worse. It has been radically diminished by the United States' decision to delay critical budgetary support and put caps on its contributions to UN peacekeeping.

Meanwhile, substantial funding cuts and the establishment of alternative political forums by the Trump administration are jeopardizing the UN's fundamental mission to protect world peace. The US decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization has disrupted progress on two of the greatest challenges for the 21st century.

If the United States steps back, China is looking to step up, as Beijing's influence within the UN system has steadily grown.

3. Effectiveness question:

As one General Assembly President put it: "Outside these walls, people are not asking whether the United Nations still exists." A recurring question was not whether the UN should exist, but whether it can produce results.

The Reform Debate - Is it Still Fit for Purpose?

The consensus title of recent debates is: "United Nations Still Essential but Needs Reform to Be 'Fit for Purpose' in Coming Decades".

A common formulation in the UK Parliament was: "Is the United Nations still relevant? Unhesitatingly, I say yes. Is it still fit for purpose? Reluctantly, I say, without reform, no."

Demands for reform centre on three issues: Security Council membership does not reflect today's world; developing countries are underrepresented and there are no permanent members from Africa or Latin America; and the five permanent members enjoy veto power.

Conclusion

The UN remains relevant as:

It is less relevant as an enforcer of international peace and security when the interests of a P5 member are involved, due to the veto. Its future relevance will likely depend on whether it can adapt its funding model, demonstrate results on climate, technology and development, and achieve Security Council reform that reflects present-day geopolitical realities rather than the balance of power in 1945.