“Intervention” Through the United Nations
By Carolina Parra
To some, intervention can only mean a series of consequences
and negative outcomes. It is agreeable that intervening between countries or
states can further deepen the problem at hand or, in some cases, not benefit
either side. However, the United Nations is an organization that deals with the
affairs between countries while maintaining peace.
In studying each school of thought, in my opinion,
liberalism has the most realistic and logical way of approaching different
matters. Through cooperation, opposing sides can find a common ground. In this blog I will be giving an insight as to
why the United Nations is a vital organization in the cooperation amongst
nations.
The intentions of the UN are solely to preserve peace
through mutual security and international collaboration. They have the biggest
collaboration in promoting world stability. I see it as a form of intervention
but intervening in a way where the situation does not worse but rather
countries progress.
For sake of providing a counterargument, one can say the
Security Council is a biased council because there are only 5 permanent members,
with veto power, that represent the whole council. This can contradict the
beliefs of the UN. Although this may seem unfair to other countries, the five
members that represent the council deserve to be representatives due to
victories in World War II.
The United Nations efforts do not go without notice. They
have made steps toward world peace by intervening nation by nation and then
coming to a common ground. I feel like without the United Nations the world would
be a place of hatred and misperception as their principles [cooperate in solving international problems, promoting
respect for human rights, maintain international peace and security, to be a
center for harmonizing the actions of nations and develop friendly relations
among nations] only promote positive intervention amongst nations.
Intervention is definitely a very controversial topic at hand. Many can argue why it is justifiable to intervene, while others simply see it as a selfish way of maintaining "peace". I do, however,agree with you when you stated that sometimes the U.N does play a significant role in keeping peace when a crisis does thrive.
ReplyDeleteWhile having 5 permanent members with veto power in the UN Security Council may seem hypocritical to the mission of the United Nations, I think realistically it is 1000x more important that these members of power stay in the UN rather than taking them off the council and risking that they leave. Plus, as they have the power and authority to keep peace, as well as the funding, having them support the decision made by the Security Council, it is much more likely that the actions actually get carried out timely and efficiently.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that the the exclusivity factor of any alliance group, such as the United Nations or the Security Council, might cause problems that were not even there to begin with. Any nation will automatically become defensive if their leadership choices are undermined by multiple other countries attempting to intervene in their government. Do you think these interventionist or peace groups are necessary and do the benefits outweigh the positives?
ReplyDelete