Reform of the United Nations

This was a chapter of a report titled “The Crisis in Multilateralism: What can Europe do?” published by UK in a Changing Europe.

Long-term Challenges

The United Nations has faced calls for reform virtually since its founding. Yet the organisation has proven notoriously difficult to effectively restructure, even as the world around it has changed dramatically. In many ways it is unsurprising that the UN represents a unique management challenge. Ultimately, it is the sum of its membership, and aligning 193 member states – all with different national interests and approaches – on budget, policy, and organisational blueprints is incredibly complex.

And clearly some of the structures that made sense in 1945 when the UN was founded don’t look very modern today. The most emblematic of these is the disproportionate influence of permanent members of the Security Council, which holds binding authority over efforts to maintain peace and security. Since the founding, China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States have held veto power over all decisions made in the Security Council, including, effectively, final say over the selection of the Secretary-General. Their institutional weight goes beyond the Council, however, as key senior leadership positions within the wider UN system are ringfenced for nationals from the ‘permanent five’. Like any other bureaucracy, UN agencies, funds, and programmes often also play a role in the resistance to change. They defend their turf, try to expand their resources and staffing, and push back against reforms designed to limit or streamline their scope. With agreements often relying on consensus among a broad array of stakeholders, it has always been relatively easy for spoilers to torpedo reform.