League of Nations, UN? What's next?

Judge for yourself: it's an unfortunate, even sadly grotesque meme, but it's what we have.

Today Bloomberg reported that NATO countries are preparing secret guidelines in case the bloc is engaged in a conflict in which allies are required to defend each other under Article 5. Because of Russia's war in Ukraine, of course.

Today, Norwegian intelligence announced that for the first time in 30 years, Russia has begun deploying ships armed with tactical nuclear weapons in the Baltic Sea.

Finally, today, the 9th meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in the Ramstein format took place in Brussels, after which the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, said that Russia "has already lost. Russia is paying a huge price on the battlefield. For Putin, it was a war of choice".

And only (!) today, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres stated the need to reform this international institution. An institution that, by default, should have been the first to respond to an unprecedented act of aggression in the center of Europe a year ago. An institution whose Security Council is still arrogantly chaired by a representative of the aggressor and destroyer of the world order.

“Only (!) today, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres stated the need to reform this international institution. An institution that, by default, should have been the first to respond to an unprecedented act of aggression in the center of Europe a year ago.”

Of course, Guterres was forced to admit that the current collective mechanisms for solving global problems do not match the scale of the challenges. Obviously, the reform program, after which the UN will become, according to the Secretary-General, "UN 2.0," is designed to eliminate what is being said not only by diplomats but also by those who are not satisfied with the current sluggishness of this structure.

But I ask myself a few questions that have not yet been answered.

Question one. Isn't the UN's "reform" overdue because of the organization's inability to respond to challenges in a timely and radical manner, especially to military conflicts? After all, let's look at how many wars (small and large) we have experienced in the last decade alone. And, in principle, if you look at them very closely, you will definitely see Russia's participation in them.

Or maybe Guterres is more afraid of the fate of the League of Nations, which was dissolved immediately after World War II for exactly the same reasons – its inability to fulfill the functions stipulated in the charter”

“Perhaps Guterres is more afraid of the fate of the League of Nations, which was dissolved immediately after World War II for exactly the same reasons – its inability to fulfill the functions stipulated in the charter”

Question two. How does the UN Secretary-General envision the transformation of this institution into a "UN 2.0" with the participation of Russia? It has been written and rewritten that Russia took a seat in the Security Council illegally, fraudulently, corrupting high-ranking representatives of the international community, including the UN Secretariat. And it has been said and retold, among other things, from the rostrum of the Organization itself by the Ukrainian representative Serhiy Kyslytsya. Will the mummy of Putin's empire be dragged into the renewed UN, and will it continue to spoil the atmosphere of this, I hope, modern and self-sufficient international body?

If the intention is different, then wouldn't it be worthwhile to kick Russians out of the Security Council Chamber at the start of the reform and force it (at least on paper) to listen to resolutions that have been saved from Russian vetoes?

The third question is probably a very controversial one. Just the other day, Poland decided to purge its foreign ministry of MGIMO graduates (Moscow State Institute of International Relations – ed.). For obvious reasons, I think. After all, as a rule, studying in this "diplomatic", if I may say so, "academy" almost automatically meant recruitment by representatives of the KGB-FSB.

“Staff for the diplomatic missions of almost half the world (Africa, Asia, Latin America) came from the classrooms of the Moscow institute. How many "birds" from MGIMO's nest represent their countries in the UN's structural units?”

Staff for the diplomatic missions of almost half the world (Africa, Asia, Latin America) came from the classrooms of the Moscow institute. How many "birds" from MGIMO's nest represent their countries in the UN's structural units?

Given the above, I dare to express a categorical opinion. No "reform" will help the UN in its current format. We should think about creating a new structure, without that infantile indifference, or even cynical conformism with evil. Taking into account the new realities of the world: a defeated, dismantled Russia. A world that will formulate effective preventive measures against wars and genocide. Without "superiority" or "chosenness" for some and a predetermined role of victims for others.

About the author. Ihor Hulyk is a journalist, editor-in-chief of the Espreso.Zakhid website.

The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the authors of the blogs.