My opinion on the subject are pretty straight forward. Although the charter specifies the purpose of the United Nations is to maintain international peace and security, they are primarily a liberal institution.
The UN was created with plans of it being this realist powerhouse of sorts. With the recent failure of the League of Nations the creators should have realized that any sort of world governing body would be very idealistic.
The UN cannot punish disobeying sovereigns. It's a popular ideology that people only follow the rules in order to escape repercussion. For instance: You're on a road trip. You're in the middle of nowhere, only car on the road. You reach a stop sign. Do you stop?
Personally, no. There are no other cars so that eliminates the safety benefits of stopping. The only reason to stop would be to avoid getting pulled over. If there is no risk of repercussion, why stop?
Back to my point:
The UN might impose sanctions if you disobey their desires, but overall they have almost no authority over sovereigns. I think they've come to realize this, so its gotten to a point where the UN compromises with a dissenter in order to salvage its reputation. Everyone receives an absolute gain, but the UN probably rarely get's the relative gain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment