Can US Engagement Rescue the United Nations From Irrelevance?
The next UN leader will take office at a time when the international body is experiencing an unprecedented crisis of purpose. By Ben Cohen
By the end of 2026, the United Nations will have selected a new Secretary-General. The incoming UN leader will take office at a time when the global intergovernmental organisation is experiencing an unprecedented crisis of purpose.
Of all the issues the UN is facing, the most serious is arguably its fractured relationship with the United States, its most powerful member state. It is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, the UN’s most powerful body. In financial terms, it is the UN’s largest donor. And it hosts the UN headquarters in New York City.
Despite this, the UN has traditionally been an adversarial forum for American diplomacy. The majority of states in the General Assembly, about 55% of the total by a recent count, range from illiberal democracies to totalitarian dictatorships, and are therefore more likely to side with China and Russia than with the United States. In some cases, these nations are assigned prestigious UN roles that make a mockery of the UN’s mission. Examples include the recent appointment of Iran, which actively seeks nuclear weapons, as vice-president of the 11th Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The question of how to advance American goals at the UN has been one of the perennial questions animating U.S. foreign policy since the UN’s creation in 1945. Given the serious problems the UN is now facing, it’s a question that is particularly relevant today.
The United Nations Is Going Broke
Too often, the UN’s valuable field work is overshadowed by cynical political posturing. As a result, collecting annual dues from member states has become more difficult.
