The Pros And Cons Of Peacekeeping
Since nearly the last World War this world has witnessed, fifty-one countries around the globe joined together as a whole and created a stepping stone in world peace and unity. The United Nations is an intergovernmental organization to promote international co-operation. In addition, it is the only organization of its kind to exist. Together, this bonding organization has a vast variety of usefulness toward all nations involved. Before the United Nations, the relationships between certain counties were more frangible than how it is now. Nonetheless, the United Nations does bare its own imperfections and thus in this essay I shall convey the issues of the United Nations that are of peacekeeping, the United Nations Security Council, and budget
…show more content…
Every country, including the United States of America, has been in dire need of protection and security assistance. The United Nations Security Council was built on the collective security system that is a security arraignment, may it be global, regional, or political, to which every state in the system understands that the security of one is a matter for all and thus commits to a collective response to threats and, of course, breaches of peace (Collective Security). The issue that the United Nations Security Council faces is that the implementation of collective security has shown to be vexed (Collective Security). For some countries, mainly smaller nations, the United Nations collective security is their only practical means for any security and therefore any flaws in the system are precarious and hazardous. To fix this inauspicious situation, I propose a new foreign policy of my own inauguration. This recently developed policy advocates that participating nations aligned with the United Nations should together create another branch within their militia that is shared and trained jointly. Enforcing such a policy would perhaps result in the dismantling of the United Nations due to that fact that a significant amount of countries would fear the idea of combining their militia with others believing they would be loosing their militia and would not have any military forces to use at their own expense. However, the newly developed foreign policy that is an extension of collective security still allows all participating nations to keep their militia the same except for the addition of a new branch. The new military branch of all participating militias would be joined together. The leaders of this new militia, the United Nations, would lead this united militia as a
Every country, including the United States of America, has been in dire need of protection and security assistance. The United Nations Security Council was built on the collective security system that is a security arraignment, may it be global, regional, or political, to which every state in the system understands that the security of one is a matter for all and thus commits to a collective response to threats and, of course, breaches of peace (Collective Security). The issue that the United Nations Security Council faces is that the implementation of collective security has shown to be vexed (Collective Security). For some countries, mainly smaller nations, the United Nations collective security is their only practical means for any security and therefore any flaws in the system are precarious and hazardous. To fix this inauspicious situation, I propose a new foreign policy of my own inauguration. This recently developed policy advocates that participating nations aligned with the United Nations should together create another branch within their militia that is shared and trained jointly. Enforcing such a policy would perhaps result in the dismantling of the United Nations due to that fact that a significant amount of countries would fear the idea of combining their militia with others believing they would be loosing their militia and would not have any military forces to use at their own expense. However, the newly developed foreign policy that is an extension of collective security still allows all participating nations to keep their militia the same except for the addition of a new branch. The new military branch of all participating militias would be joined together. The leaders of this new militia, the United Nations, would lead this united militia as a