The UN can get involved in world disputes only when the interests of the 5 permanent members coincide or when they are not greatly concerned about an issue. This prevented the UN from acting many times, like in Vietnam.
Therefore, both the membership of the General Assembly and of the Security Council determined to a too large extent how the UN responds to international disputes. Therefore it is true that the organisation of the UN hinders its effectiveness.
It was agreed that if the Security Council could not reach an agreement to intervene in a crisis, then the General Assembly could recommend the use of armed force. This is the ‘Uniting for Peace’ resolution. However, problems occurred like in the Hungarian Uprising when the Soviets refused to comply with the resolutions passed and they were safe behind the ‘iron curtain’. Therefore no restructuring of the UN could overcome the determination of superpowers to refuse co-operation and other external factors such as the Cold War, which hindered its effectiveness.
Under the leadership of Dag Hammarskjöld the UN was capable to re-unite Congo, restore law and order and remove foreign troops from the country. This could happen because the UN’s organisation allows one man to give constructive leadership and Dag was a determined, active and skilled leader. When the UN had less effective leaders its effectiveness dropped as well. Therefore it seems that the organisation can be effective - if the right man is in the charge!.
The UK and the US withdrew from the UNESCO and the US from ILO as a result of what they saw as political inertia. Following this the UN experienced some financial problems and thus some work programmes had to be cancelled. Therefore the superpower rivalry had negative effects even on the UN’s specialised agencies, suggesting that the manner in which the UN is organised hinders both its financial wealth and development programs, further reducing its effectiveness as a humanitarian body.
In the 1965 war between India and Pakistan the Security Council called for a cease fire, sent missions to both countries and thus brought the war to an end. This shows how well the UN can act when its members co-operate. Therefore the UN can be an effective organisation - despite its organisation - but only it its member’s interest coincide. This is all too rare.
