Adding to the list of criticisms, The United Nations also faces enormous criticism for not getting involved in genocides that occur in parts of the world that aren’t Europe. One example was the genocide that occurred in Rwanda in the 1990’s. There was a huge outcry from victims of the genocide for international intervention, and the UN did not do a single thing until after the genocide ended. If the United Nations is going to claim that they want to stop genocides from happening, then they need to actually start getting involved in hostile countries.
However, I imagine that it is difficult to create enough manpower to invade these foreign countries. The United Nations is rather small, despite having one hundred and ninety-three counties a part of it, and not nearly as powerful as when it started. I do believe that the United Nations does have some power, it could regularly meet with countries that are not apart of the United Nations and attempt at some negotiations.
The countries involved in the United Nations need to come together and discuss plans of how to invade a country that has a genocide, and definitions of genocide in every culture. This includes setting up funding for the United Nations from each country involved, as well as commitments to aid in countries that may be committing genocide.While I think that the latter would be difficult to conclude, it’s worth it in the long run. Looking at the world through a specific, unwavering opinion does not bring good results when the United Nations wants to save people from every country. It’s important for the United Nations to become as global as they possibly can with different cultural definitions of genocide. Listening to the citizens of a country and abiding by their definitions of what they consider a genocide to be not only gives the United Nations trust, it also helps with staging plans of intervening a genocide.
The United Nations genocide stance started after the Holocaust, when a country’s government began the mass murder on a religious group. That is what the “standard” genocide looks like. But a genocide may not be as cookie-cutter as that. In the case of the genocide in Rwanda, it began as rebels mass murdering an ethnic group. They did later seize the government of Rwanda, but it did not start out in the way that the Holocaust did. Again, the United Nations needs to create a better definition of a genocide.
The United Nations was formed with good intentions, and because of that I believe that they can absolutely do incredible things to help others. They have aided counties in national disasters, environment upkeep, and healthcare. There needs to be more productivity in the way that they handle genocides and in understanding how other countries perceive genocide. It’s admirable that the United Nations attempts to be peacekeepers of the world. It’s a very difficult thing to do, and they aren’t very good at trying to keep the peace sometimes, but the United Nations as of right now has huge potential to make differences across the world.
70 Ways the UN Makes A Difference | United Nations Seventieth Anniversary. UN News Center. http://www.un.org/un70/en/content/70ways. Accessed July 17, 2016.
Rwanda: How the genocide happened. BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13431486. Published May 17, 2011. Accessed July 17, 2016.