The United Nations is supposed to be an intergovernmental organization and not for profit entity that claims in its mission statement ‘The maintenance of international peace and security.’ Adding in; ‘Eradicating conflicts across the globe is the pivotal duty of this organization.’ How is that going so far considering the totality in time that the United Nations has been around?
In October of 1945 the United Nations was formed within the national boundaries of the United States of America following the actions taken by parties on both sides of that conflict known as World War II. The First World War, originally called The Great War, because at the time most people could not perceive nor imagine a greater and more devastating conflict and well obviously they were wrong, as history has proven.
So now this author must demand the question ‘how well has the United Nations met its self proclaimed mission?’ In addition, have the countries which have invested resources towards the United Nations reaped the benefit of those investments? There seems to be twelve current United Nations peace keeping missions that are still on-going. The longest peacekeeping mission began in the Middle East dating back to 1948(1). This of course, begs the question of where is the return on investment for the United Nations?
The World Health Organization is a branch of the United Nations and it states that the goal of this body is: ‘the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health’.
The last two years plus, starting in 2019, must not be forgotten due to the social and financial impact inflicted upon the attainment by peoples across the globe to better their own lives. The reader should also reflect upon the impact that the World Health Organization has had on the people of this planet.
Current estimates state that 811 million people regularly go to bed hungry. Nutrition, the core of any health regiment seems to have been offloaded to the successful countries. The World Health Organization also appeared somewhat inconsistent on how it reacted to a global pandemic.
The reader might assume that many of the people who work for the World Health Organization have medical backgrounds though this just might not be the case. This author likes to push a pencil as much as the next bloke, yet at some point it must be recognized that a wheelbarrow full of architects and engineers are completely useless if the world is bereft of stonemasons, carpenters, pipefitters, glaziers and yes electricians.
During the years of COVID-19 much of the world looked to the World Health Organization for advice, at it seemed so far beyond the pale it didn’t seem to be anywhere near the horizon on the matter at hand. Once again the reader should consider what is the return on investment reaped from the World Health Organization?
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, strives to promote ‘world peace and security through international cooperation.’ Compare that to the previously mention United Nations mission statement of ‘The maintenance of international peace and security’, which begs the following two questions:
- Why does an organization dedicated to world peace need a sub-organization committed to world peace?
- Additionally, if the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization pins its hope and mission on international cooperation, then what was the United Nations pinning its hope and mission on when it was started?
This author would like to propose a situation just to see what happens. First world nations pay a premium to the United Nations and its subsidiaries, for privileges, along with providing food to third world countries. What does the reader feel would be the result of first world nations saying to the United Nations, ‘we donated food to a third world country and that value is going be withheld from the United Nations.’ How fast does the reader feel the United Nations and its subsidiaries would put a halt to that practice?
This author would like to thank the reader for making this far into the article. The use of the full name of each of the organization was both arduous to write and read, though it was done with purpose. By maintaining the full name of each organization, which was done to remind the reader why these organizations were created and named to do.
One must remember what an acronym stands for in order to understand the purpose of the item the acronym stands for, when the name aligns with the purpose. So, here is the collection of acronyms that could have been used in this article in place of the full name: UN, WHO, UNESCO, and ROI. Return on Investment (ROI) was left as the last acronym to cause the reader to beg the question of where is the ROI when it comes to the UN, WHO and UNESCO, which has a budget that exceeds $6,370,000,000.00 USD for the fiscal year of 2021 to 2022.
By the reducing of the full name to an acronym the intent within that name becomes lost. The comedian George Carlin pointed this out in the transition of purpose with the shift from Shell Shock to PTSD in reference to the mental health of solders since The Great War.
No comments:
Post a Comment