As the United Nations marks its 80th anniversary this month, the mood at its New York headquarters is anything but celebratory. Instead of basking in the glow of eight decades dedicated to international peace and cooperation, diplomats and world leaders are embroiled in heated debates about the UN’s continued relevance and effectiveness in the face of mounting global crises.
The UN Charter, a document born out of the ashes of World War II and signed by fifty nations in San Francisco in June 1945, officially came into force on October 24 of that year. Its lofty aim, as stated in its preamble, was "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war." Yet, as the international body wraps up its annual General Assembly in 2025, conflict and division seem more prevalent than ever—casting a long shadow over the UN’s founding promise.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has repeatedly insisted that the Charter "is a promise of peace, dignity and cooperation among nations." But the reality on the ground tells a more complicated story. According to reporting by France 24, critics argue that the organization has been "utterly helpless in stopping the countless conflicts that have broken out since its inception and which continue around the globe today."
Nowhere was this criticism more pointed than in the remarks of US President Donald Trump during his address to the General Assembly on September 22, 2025. Trump openly mocked the UN, asking, "What is the purpose of the United Nations? All they seem to do is write a really strongly worded letter. It's empty words, and empty words don't solve war." He didn’t stop there, taking aim at Guterres’s leadership and suggesting the UN "could be unbelievable with certain people running it." These comments came on the heels of Guterres’s own warning that US-led aid cuts were "wreaking havoc" around the world.
The skepticism isn’t limited to Washington. Kenya's President William Ruto, in a candid interview with France 24 from New York, warned that "unless the UN is reformed, its own survival is at stake." Ruto called for sweeping changes to the Security Council and the broader international financial architecture, echoing a sentiment that has become increasingly common among member states frustrated with the organization’s structure and perceived inertia.
At the heart of these debates lies the UN Charter itself—a dense document of 19 chapters and 111 articles that outlines principles such as peaceful dispute settlement, state sovereignty, equality, humanitarian cooperation, and respect for human rights. Chapter VII of the Charter grants the Security Council the authority to impose sanctions or even deploy military force if global peace is threatened. Yet, as history has shown time and again, the Council’s five permanent members—the US, China, Russia, France, and the UK—hold veto power, which has often paralyzed action on the world’s most pressing conflicts.
According to Global News, the UN currently counts 193 member states and has expanded its mission far beyond what its founders envisioned in 1945. New initiatives include the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and international agreements on climate action. But even as the organization’s scope has grown, its ability to enforce its core principles remains in question. The Charter’s provisions are difficult to amend, and its principles have been violated repeatedly over the past eight decades.
Disagreements among member states often center on whether the right to self-determination outweighs the principle of non-interference in a state’s internal affairs, or if the right to self-defense can justify acts of aggression. These debates are not merely academic—they have real-world consequences. In June 2025, for example, Iran, backed by China, accused the United States of violating the UN Charter by striking Iranian nuclear sites. The US, for its part, justified its actions under the doctrine of "collective self-defense."
Gissou Nia, a fellow with the Atlantic Council, told AFP, "Once impunity reigns on one set of violations, one that's never dealt with, it continues, and countries use it as justification for the actions that they take." She added, "For self-defence, you really have to show evidence of an imminent attack. I think that it's one of the more contentious issues that involve the UN Charter and the narrative has really gotten away from us."
The UN’s inability to address the "crime of aggression" is starkly evident in its response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. While Guterres and the General Assembly condemned the invasion as a clear violation of the Charter, Russia’s veto in the Security Council blocked any meaningful action. This isn’t the first time the Council’s structure has stymied accountability; the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 similarly exposed the limits of the UN’s power when major states are involved.
Although the Charter technically allows for the expulsion of persistent violators, this provision has never been exercised. The closest the UN came was in 1974, when South Africa was suspended from the General Assembly over its apartheid policies—a ban that lasted two decades. For most other violations, the UN’s response has been limited to statements, resolutions, and, as Trump derisively put it, "strongly worded letters."
Financial woes are compounding these structural challenges. According to Global News, the UN is grappling with budget shortfalls and growing geopolitical divides, all of which are testing its ability to maintain global diplomacy. The United States, traditionally the organization’s largest funder, has grown increasingly skeptical, with aid cuts threatening to undermine critical missions worldwide.
Eric Sorensen, reporting for Global News, notes that these challenges have led to "questions about the body's relevance due to financial shortfalls, geopolitical divides, and skepticism from the United States as of late September 2025." The organization’s future, he suggests, may hinge on whether it can adapt to new realities and whether countries like Canada can step up to play a more significant role in global diplomacy.
Despite all the criticism, the UN continues to serve as the primary forum for international dialogue, humanitarian assistance, and the pursuit of global goals. Its very existence is a testament to the enduring hope that nations, despite their differences, can work together for the greater good. Yet, as the world marks the UN’s 80th year, the question remains: Can the organization reform and revitalize itself, or will it be consigned to the sidelines of history?
As diplomats and leaders look ahead to the next chapter, the stakes couldn’t be higher. The UN’s ability to adapt—or not—will shape the future of international cooperation for generations to come.
