The UN was formed by the big powers for their own self interest, with them having the final say and them dominating the organisation, which they do to this day. For them, the UN only "works" if it toes their line. If it decides to develop a will of its own, the UN is accused of "not working, and needs reforming" and out comes the veto. And this is democracy?
The US and other permanent members have never been shy to use their veto either, should their self interest be affected. All this nonsense about it being to benefit the world is patently not true. People in the West, ala John Howard, have a regular habit of blaming the UN when its decision does not favour their tinted view of the world. But the same John Howards suddenly become great fans of the UN when they want to bully it into doing something.
If the West wants the organisation to work, then give it the teeth and the power to do so. But don't expect it to toe oyur favoured position all the time. Despite all the obstacles thrown in its way, it still somehow works - not perfect, but then what is?
And your article by Avi Liebler - can you expect someone (who from the name I would expect to be pro- Israel) to say anything else ? For every such article, one could produce lots written by others who would refute that view.
Knocking the UN is in vogue at present, but it is sad that an organisation set up to be a world unit is not allowed to function because of self interest, especially by the big powers.
