Is the United Nations still relevant?

Is the UN still relevant? I'll weigh its track record against today's global crises.

Is the United Nations still relevant? The answer at its 80th anniversary depends on how you define relevance - as a universal forum and humanitarian system versus as an effective enforcer of peace and security. The debate is active precisely because both are true.

> As the United Nations marks its 80th anniversary, the question of the body’s relevance looms large. Undercut by financial shortfalls, US retrenchment, and growing geopolitical divides, can the UN remain a vital stage for global diplomacy

Why Many Say: Yes, Still Indispensable

1. It remains the only universal platform.
The UN has grown from 50 Member States in 1945 to 193 todayand brings 193 countries together to find solutions to common challenges. Its enduring achievement, in the words of one senior official, is "still being here and relevant for 193 countries today"providing support to the most vulnerable and providing the platform for negotiation.

The sheer turnout shows this convening power. World leaders have voiced support for the unifying function of the United Nations as the General Assembly neared its 80th anniversary. Despite doom and gloom messages about irrelevance, 113 of the 194 delegations that spoke at UN81 were Heads of State or Government.

> If turning up is what matters, then 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

As Germany's President of the General Assembly Annalena Baerbock said during the 2025 high-level week: the United Nations is still relevant.

That perception is global. Most publics in the 25-nation 2025 Pew Global Attitudes Survey hold net-positive views of the United Nations. The system is described as providing convening power to bring all stakeholders together to help address specific issues.

2. Humanitarian, development and normative work.
Alongside peacekeeping, the UN established specialized agencies such as WHO, UNICEF, UNDP, and UNHCR, which have alleviated poverty, improved global health, advanced education, and protected vulnerable populations.

Concrete impacts cited include:

In its core Charter purpose - preventing another world war between great powers - some analysts argue it has succeeded, acting less as a "Parliament of Man" than a Concert of Great Powers.

Why Many Say: No Longer Effective

1. Security Council paralysis.

The central criticism is the Security Council structure, largely unchanged since 1945. The five Permanent members - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States - have held veto power since the inception of the Council.

That veto is seen as an outdated relic that paralyzes action when a veto holder is a party or patron to a conflict, as on Gaza and Ukraine. As General Assembly President Khalilur Rahman put it:

> "Outside these walls, people are not asking whether the United Nations still exists. They are asking whether it works"

He acknowledged failures including the unresolved Palestinian question and ongoing wars in Sudan, Gaza, Ukraine, Myanmar. India's envoy at a 2025 Security Council open debate said the UN has over time "lost its unique identity and foundational focus"while being founded as a beacon of hope.

Historic failures reinforce this: UN peacekeeping was accused of being a bystander unable to prevent mass atrocities in Rwanda (1994) and Bosnia (1995). In Rwanda, the UN Assistance Mission failed to prevent the mass killing of nearly 800,000 people, and in Srebrenica over 8,000 Bosnian Muslims were killed despite UN presence. Criticism has re-emerged with inaction on Ukraine and Gaza.

> The most fundamental challenge to the relevance of the United Nations is intimately linked to perceptions of its legitimacy. For many, this has been irretrievably compromised. Of the five permanent members, one—Russia—has blatantly violated the sovereignty of Ukraine. A second—China—has refused to condemn this violation

Former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned the Council’s repeated use of veto "to shield themselves, their allies and their proxies" means "Without it, the UN risks lurching towards either collapse or irrelevance".

Reform demands are now universal but contradictory: Spain called for scrapping the veto outright and fairer regional representation, while Africa - without a permanent seat after eight decades - demands permanent representation as a matter of fairness and credibility summarized as "Africa needs a seat at the table, not to be on the menu".

2. Effectiveness and resource gap.

When measured by its ability to deliver impactful, material solutions, the United Nations’ relevance looks far worse. It has been radically diminished by the United States’ decision to delay critical budgetary support and put caps on peacekeeping contributions, with China also delaying support, shrinking its ability to tackle climate, health, humanitarian and development goals.

A stark imbalance was flagged: development assistance fell 23 per cent year-on-year to roughly $175 billion, even as global military spending approached $3 trillion – marking 11 consecutive years of growth. Progress has stalled for a third of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals targets.

A recurring question throughout reform debates was not whether the United Nations should exist, but whether it can produce results.

Conclusion: Relevant but at a Crossroads

The UN is often described as suffering from paradox: its institutional architecture remains anchored in the post-1945 settlement, yet the order it was designed to govern is increasingly contested.

It is still relevant as:

It is increasingly seen as irrelevant or ineffective as a guarantor of peace and security when great-power interests collide, unless it undertakes deep structural reform beyond cosmetic budget changesand honest acknowledgment of institutional shortcomings.

As one UN analysis summarized: The UN’s survival for 80 years is not, by itself, proof of success - relevance will depend on whether member states allow it to adapt to a multipolar, fiscally constrained world.