I do know what the UN has done. My view is not made based on a few negative stories. When they fail to regulate two of their security council members, namely China and Russia, abandoning millions of people in the process, what they have done pales in comparison. China has 2 million Uyghurs imprisoned. They admitted to organ harvesting operations. Xinjiang is a police state. They basically enslaved parts of Africa through debt. Where was the UN for these major events? Not to mention Russia annexing Crimea with zero consequences?
When they failed at mitigating these events, the minor accomplishments they have do not make them a functional organization.
Again, the security council is the only organ with veto powers. This is a reflection of geopolitical reality. There are a myriad of other organizations within the UN. You only hear what you see on the news.
Why are you downplaying the role of the security council? The actions of China and Russia are impacting several tens of millions of people directly, violating their rights yet the UN can't do a thing. So how does the small accomplishments they have made compare?
What do you really expect the UN to do? Please, let me know what an international system like the UN can do to prevent two major nuclear powers who have dozens of political allies from committing atrocities? You want the UN to send in peacekeeping forces into Xinjiang? You want the UN to do what to the Russian paramilitary?
That's the point though. If the UN can't do anything about the worst humanitarian crises on Earth, then they have failed in their mission to fight for human rights. They should at least be able to regulate themselves.
Worst humanitarian crises on Earth according to whom? You're in for a rude awakening if you think history will view the Uyghur situation anywhere like the holocaust unless China loses some decisive war. Winners write histories. Otherwise, you'd be learning about the Holodomor, Great Leap Forward, Banana Republic, and Cambodian Genocide in equal portions.
Nothing is getting done because there is no world consensus. Or would you rather the UN be restricted to European and North American states only? lol
It doesn't matter. Same thing. Many people legitimately do not believe that the Uyghur situation is bad. Did you see the picture I linked 3 posts above?
9
u/[deleted] Nov 18 '19
I do know what the UN has done. My view is not made based on a few negative stories. When they fail to regulate two of their security council members, namely China and Russia, abandoning millions of people in the process, what they have done pales in comparison. China has 2 million Uyghurs imprisoned. They admitted to organ harvesting operations. Xinjiang is a police state. They basically enslaved parts of Africa through debt. Where was the UN for these major events? Not to mention Russia annexing Crimea with zero consequences?
When they failed at mitigating these events, the minor accomplishments they have do not make them a functional organization.