Is the United Nations still relevant?

Is the UN still relevant? I'll gather current assessments and evidence to answer.

The United Nations - which will mark its 80th anniversary on Oct. 24, 2025 - is still relevant, but its relevance is increasingly contested and conditional on reform. The debate is not settled as yes or no.

The short answer

> Short answer: Yes, but not for the reasons its defenders usually claim

Most assessments today are best summarized as: Is the United Nations still relevant? Unhesitatingly, I say yes. Is it still fit for purpose? Reluctantly, I say, without reform, no.

At the close of the 80th UN General Assembly General Debate, General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock said the United Nations is still relevant, while the Assembly as a whole heard that the United Nations, notwithstanding its inadequacies and failures, was an indispensable "family of nations" , but that it Still Essential but Needs Reform to Be 'Fit for Purpose'.

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

Why it is still seen as relevant

1. No alternative universal platform: With 193 member states, it provides a platform for dialogue and collective action on global issues. It provides a platform for dialogue and negotiation among member states, facilitates humanitarian aid, and supports peacekeeping operations.

Even critics note: For that, we do not have any alternative to the United Nations as of now. Global challenges such as terrorism, food crisis, and water scarcity need global solutions.

If turning up is what matters, the sheer popularity of the forum with world leaders is a clear indicator that the United Nations is widely viewed to be politically relevant. More than 190 member states, with only a few exceptions, send representatives to New York for high-level week.

2. Core security function - preventing great-power war: The United Nations is still relevant if one keeps in mind the core purpose of its founding: to prevent another world war between the great powers. In that sense it is best not thought of as a "Parliament of Man" but as a "Concert of Great Powers".

3. Humanitarian, development and normative work:

Since it was established, it promoted international economic development and built good relations among countries, and The fact that the UN has promoted technological and economic development since 1945 and is still promoting proves the point that the UN is still relevant.

4. Continued global legitimacy: Though the United Nations may not be a priority for Americans, the United Nations' image around the world remains favorable. Most publics in the 25-nation 2025 Pew Global Attitudes Survey hold net-positive views of the United Nations, and several nations - such as South Africa, Nigeria, and Germany - have seen favorable views rise.

Why its relevance is questioned

1. Security Council paralysis: The most powerful organ, the UNSC, has only 5 permanent members (the US, UK, Russia, China, France) + 10 non-permanent members. This is resulting in the misuse of power by the 5 permanent members using their veto power. They often block key decisions.

The Security Council's structure is outdated, giving disproportionate power to the five permanent members (P5) and Critics argue the UN does not adequately represent developing countries and needs institutional reform. As debates note, The world has changed so much since 1945, but the UN hasn't changed at the same pace, and it does not reflect contemporary geopolitical realities or provide equitable representation for developing countries and the Global South.

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has sharply questioned the effectiveness arguing the organisation has become largely disconnected from major international decision-making because of persistent deadlock within the UN Security Council.

Currently, the national interests of the permanent five members are in conflict. As a result, the UNSC is not able to undertake any meaningful action.

2. Erosion of legitimacy and hypocrisy: 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. A third - the United States - is seen to have hit a high-water mark in its hypocrisy by providing seemingly unconditional support for Israel's atrocities against Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

3. Failure to stop major wars: The United Nations (UN) is not able to end the Russia-Ukraine & Israel-Hamas wars. So, there are debates worldwide about the inability of the UN to establish peace. The Russia-Ukraine war, which was started in 2022 has been going on for more than 600 days... but the UN is not able to stop this war, and critics note Other critics question its effectiveness and relevance because in most high-profile cases, there are essentially no consequences for violating a Security Council resolution.

4. Funding, bureaucracy and effectiveness: Debate over reform has been widespread. Under-funding, mounting bureaucracy, lack of unity, and disagreements among states have led to the decreasing effectiveness and relevance of the UN.

When measured by its ability to deliver impactful, material solutions to the most critical global problems, 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 its contributions to UN peacekeeping. The upshot is that the United Nations' ability to tackle climate change, global health risks, humanitarian disasters, technological change, and longer-term development goals is shrinking, and it is shrinking rapidly. The United States 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. The funding for the UN is influencing its operations. This is constituting to misuse of power. The United States is its largest donor.

Peacekeeping missions sometimes lack resources or clear mandates. Bureaucracy, slow decisionmaking, and political influence reduce effectiveness.

Can it remain relevant?

There is broad consensus that reform is necessary. As many countries are suggesting, veto power should be eliminated and UNSC should be expanded to have a better representation. One of the most significant debates concerns Security Council reform, with many Member States arguing the Council's current structure does not adequately reflect contemporary geopolitical realities.

Proposed fixes across debates include:

The conclusion echoed across many analyses is that The United Nations is still relevant to the present times but is in need of reforms. UNSC should be reformed to suit the 21st century.

In a multipolar world where overlapping orders compete, analysts argue that In 2025, the UN's future lies in adapting to and facilitating the co-existence of these overlapping orders. If it cannot produce results and reflect today's realities, not the post-war power arrangements of 1945, it risks being seen as obsolete - but as long as states continue to use it as the only universal legitimacy-granting, norm-setting and humanitarian coordinating body, no other institution currently replaces it.