What would have happened in Syria if the UN made sense
What is the mission of the UN? I won't go through its mission statement. Historically, the UN is the alliance of armed nations that defeated Japanazis in the second world war. Remnants of that still lingers in the organisation. My question is more "What the UN ought to be", which is similar today to "what the UN is trying to be", regardless of its outdated constitution.
The UN is like the supervisor in an orphanage. It makes sure the kids don't hurt each other. Remove him, and it's Lord of the Flies all over again. Nations are like 5 year-olds. They'll sneak up on a smaller kid while the supervisor is not looking to get his lunch money, pokemon cards, marbles, new jacket and will stop short of killing him only because that would get them into trouble. Remove the supervisor, they'll bring knives. It will be a bloodbath.
Ideally, the supervisor is a big guy with a booming voice. When he yells, the whole courtyard turns. This is something bullies understand. "Bigger than them". If the supervisor was smaller than them, surely the bullies would wonder why they should behave. What's the supervisor gonna do about it if they beat the crap out of a smaller kid? Surely not much. He's gonna grow hysterical, he's gonna tell them they're bad, but what's he gonna do? Surely not much.
Now this is already bad enough, but it could be worse. It could be that, before the supervisor is allowed to yell at a bully, it has to ask permission to the five biggest kids in the courtyard. Now that's complete nonsense isn't it? Well, that's how the UN works. And it's smaller than the smallest bully.
The five countries in the Permanent Security Council own the UN. Those five countries are just the ones that won 2nd world war. They have no legitimacy whatsoever. If anything they should be excluded, for being the five countries that spend the most in weapons. If there's any bully-warning sign, this should be it. But instead, they have decided between themselves that all countries should rotate in the Security Council, except Them, and that They only should yield veto power. Now how fucking arrogant is that? I'll tell you how: It's fucking mega-arrogant. And this is the peace-keeper of the world? Well, at least there is one.
Because, having a supervisor is a good thing. However ill-fitted and powerless. Only a few bullies will insist we'd be better off without it.
But we could make the UN evolve. In very few steps, we could have a balsy but yet reasonable entity supervising the courtyard-world, making sure no one is making any one bleed. To be independent from the bullies, all that needs to be done is that the status of Permanent Security Council Member be done away with. To be big enough to be respected by the bullies, it needs its own army. The UN has no army. When it needs boots on the ground, it kindly asks its member countries if it can borrow soldiers here and there. It takes months before blue berets can be deployed. With a small rapid-reaction force, the UN would actually be respected by some bullies. With a big one, it would be respected by all. Let me go one step beyond. If the UN had an army (and was independent from the bullies), many small developing countries could stop spending money in military. Because they'd know blue berets would be on the ground the day after an aggression. Don't think it's preposterous. Many countries already choose to maintain no army. Many are island states or micro-states, and some are Panama, Iceland and Costa Rica. Where "the budget previously dedicated to the military now is dedicated to security, education and culture" (wikipedia).
In facts, many a small reform to the UN would make the world a much nicer place to be in. But just with those two, you tackle most of the issues. What do you think would be happening in Syria now, if the UN was not bound down by Russian and Chinese veto and if it had military capabilities? You're thinking of blue-helmet soldiers fighting against Syria's standing army? Nonsense. Instead, when Ban Ki Moon said "Violence must stop right now", when it all started, violence would have stopped. Because bullies do behave when there is a supervisor that is bigger than them and doesn't answer to their friend-bullies.
Enough already with blog articles?