The UN 80 Years Later: Let's Change Our Analytical Software!

The UN 80 Years Later: Let's Change Our Analytical Software!

On April 25, 1945, the San Francisco Conference opened. At its final session on June 26, 1945, the Conference adopted the Charter of the United Nations. Its final ratification took place on October 24, 1945, and paved the way for the creation of the UN.
The fundamental principle of the text lies in the affirmation that relations between states and the settlement of disputes should no longer be based on the use of force but on political means.
At the end of the Second World War, the creation of the United Nations, based on a common Charter, with structures such as the General Assembly and, above all, the Security Council, could be seen as a construct somewhat alien to the peoples, even though its Charter begins with "We, the peoples." It was first and foremost an agreement, a compromise between major powers, between the victors of the war. It should be noted that the key points of the balance of power (composition of the Security Council, veto power, Chapter VII, and the use of force) were settled directly between the USA and the USSR. The general content of the text, as well as its preamble, was discussed by the 850 representatives and 2,500 advisors from fifty-one states at the San Francisco Conference.
From the outset, a contradiction appeared in the background between the functioning of the Security Council, its five permanent members, their "veto power" favoring state sovereignty, and the content of numerous articles and the Preamble of the Charter, beginning with "We the peoples."
The four decades of the Cold War saw the functioning of the United Nations partially blocked by the confrontation between the two superpowers, the USA and the USSR, although this did not prevent the institution from being a crucible of peoples' liberation struggles for decolonization. After the end of the Cold War, the "We the Peoples" movement regained strength through all the major international conferences, which led to the emergence of new concepts (human development, human security, culture of peace) and new rights (children's rights, women's rights, environmental rights).
However, those who champion state power have repeatedly launched attacks against multilateralism: Trump, Putin, and Netanyahu are the latest incarnations.
It is in this complex situation that we must consider today's world with the necessary perspective.
********
Today, the planet has changed profoundly: all the world's states are members of the United Nations (nearly 200 today!), all the major problems facing humanity are globalized on a global scale (from the environment to war), and a dense network of UN organizations (WHO, FAO, UNESCO, etc.) provides standards for all economic and cultural aspects of the planet. We can be proud of having, for 80 years, succeeded in "saving future generations from the scourge of war" by avoiding, so far, a Third World War, which, given the weapons accumulated today, would be the last for humanity.
Let us understand that in 80 years we have built a "global common home," or, more precisely, a "global common co-ownership" with its Union Council (the Security Council), its co-ownership regulations (the United Nations Charter), and its Assembly of Co-owners (the General Assembly). We may not be aware of it, but the facts are there.
If we had not established these co-ownership regulations, this United Nations Charter, in 1945, amidst the ruins, but also the hopes of the Liberation, it would be impossible today, without thinking, to rebuild this human project.
We need to reflect on today's world in a new way. In this analysis, we must take several innovations in the United Nations Charter as a blessing: the creation of the foundations of a "multilateral" world, since voting in the General Assembly is based on the principle of "one member, one vote," even if, in the Security Council, a kind of representation "per share" (the five permanent members and their "right of veto") was initially imposed.
We can be proud that for 80 years, we have succeeded "in saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war" by avoiding, so far, a Third World War, which would be the last.
We have no reason to be ashamed of this tool, this co-ownership regulation, since it establishes as an absolute priority "the resolution of conflicts by peaceful means, in accordance with the principles of justice and international law." This absolute requirement is found throughout the Charter, including to frame the right to "self-defense" in Article 51 or to support the recommendation to limit military spending as much as possible ("by diverting only the minimum of human and economic resources to armaments").
World's Rights") in Article 26.
It is this absolute requirement of international law that the major state powers have been trying to hide, distort, and weaken for 80 years. We must become imbued with this reality:
"WE THE PEOPLES, we are in our common home, our common co-ownership. WE have OUR co-ownership regulations and WE are collectively responsible for enforcing them, or even improving them, in the face of a few thugs who would like to impose their interpretation of the co-ownership regulations on us."
In 2024, despite the horrors of bloody conflicts in Gaza, Ukraine, and the Congo, international law and justice burst onto the world political stage.
For the first time in their history, their most representative bodies intervened directly on burning current issues. In January 2024, the International Court of Justice did not hesitate to address, investigate, and judge, at the request of South Africa, accusations of genocide in Palestine, resulting from indiscriminate Israeli repression. In July, it did not hesitate to issue an opinion, finally clearly establishing that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza since 1967 was illegal and that Israel must leave these occupied territories. This is the first time this has been decided so clearly since 1967.
If it hadn't been for the ICJ, we would not be able to officially speak of genocide, we would not be able to assert that the Israeli occupation is illegal.
For its part, the recently created International Criminal Court has made two crucial decisions: in 2023, it issued an international arrest warrant against Russian leader Vladimir Putin, accused of child deportations. For two years, the leader of one of the five permanent members of the Security Council has been unable to leave his country without risking arrest (apart from the small neighboring country of Kazakhstan). In 2024, the ICC issued an arrest warrant against the Israeli Prime Minister and his Defense Minister, as well as against two senior Hamas leaders, all accused of war crimes. Once again, these figures risk being arrested in all European countries and other countries around the world if they leave their country's borders. Admittedly, they have escaped arrest so far, with the complicity of leaders like Trump and Orban, but again, these are unprecedented decisions.
If it weren't for the ICC, the impunity of heads of state as war criminals would not be a topic of political debate. Let's be clear that respect for and enforcement of these decisions will progress in parallel with the perception that we are part of a global community and that it is normal to apply rules within it.
Eighty years after the end of the Second World War, we must update our approach to international relations! We must change our perspective and move from an "externalized" perception of the United Nations to an "internalized" perception of the United Nations, of its Charter as our rule of life together.
It seems to me that we cannot simply repeat slogans like "rebuilding international institutions," which were valid fifty years ago, during the Cold War, when the two "Great Powers" instrumentalized the United Nations system, without taking into account the profound changes in the world today in our analyses.
If we have this internalized vision, this desire to take ownership of our common co-ownership, we will remove obstacles in people's minds to building major struggles for peace. It will become possible to develop more powerful opinion campaigns and actions on a global scale.
The nature of the efforts to win structural reforms (Security Council reform or the role of civil society) will change. We have our "common co-ownership," but within the "Union Council," there is a blocking minority that is preventing it from operating in a way that benefits everyone. We must isolate this minority and ensure that the right decisions are made for peace, development, and the protection of the planet. If we make these issues understood, today, power can change sides. This, thanks to the United Nations and international law, is our path forward.
This renewed approach to international relations raises many questions and deserves broad debate. Let us seize the opportunity of 2025, the 80th anniversary of the creation of the United Nations and its Charter!
Daniel Durand – International Relations Researcher
President of the IDRP – April 15, 2025