By Sarath Dissanayake –

Sarath Dissanayake

For some, the title of my write-up “Whither UN, Multilateralism, Diplomacy : Why do they matter more than ever” may sound a bit hawkish, while others might feel it is simply preposterous. Whatever that may be, it is worth a read.

The old adage “When the going gets tough, the tough get going”;  though conceptually revolves around a positive human mindset, paradoxically however, it resonates well with the status-quo of current realities and power dynamics, in which the mighty has the edge over the weak in terms of today’s global sphere of influence.

Rule-based world order in jeopardy 

The world in which we live today is in grave danger amidst internecine conflicts and polarization of states along the fault lines of race, religion, ethnicity, color, geographical barriers, giving rise to prejudice, hatred and animosity within and without national jurisdictions. The status-quo remains all the more grim, and is further compounded by the seemingly hapless behavior of the United Nations (UN)  and, the dictums of ultra nationalist leaders, hellbent on throwing their weight around, with no regard to the due decorum and decency for the rule-based world order, in all but name.

UN and multilateralism at stake 

Aghast, the United States of America (USA) and Russia, the world’s two most powerful states acting as if law-unto-themselves, by and large have been responsible for the mess we have gotten ourselves into. On the one hand, Russia’s long drawn war against Ukraine has made parts of Europe into submission, while America’s perceived war mongering on the other, has plunged the Latin American and the Caribbean region into a state of anarchy, with further escalation on the cards (Cuba, Columbia et-al). That being said, the UN has become almost powerless and irrelevant in the face of growing uncertainty looming over the 193-member world body, sans, no clear mandate or strategy emanating from it, viz-a-viz, 5-member Security Council calling the shots on their whims and fancies. A case in point is the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) meeting on 05th January 2026 on the post-American adventure in Venezuela, triggering an avalanche of crises and abyss in the UN. Notwithstanding, America’s high handed action and capture of a sitting president drew sharp criticism, besides the United Nations Secretary General’s (UNSG) call for respect for national sovereignty, citing dangerous precedents, a sentiment echoed by many members, though no formal resolution or consensus reached.

Transition of global political landscape 

True to its motto, the United Nations founded in 1945, set the stage for (1) de-escalation of tensions, (2) maintenance of peace and security, and, (3) ushering in a rule-based world order. The post-war global order had been rooted in a bipolar world, where America and Russia played a pivotal stabilization role, whereby the nation states remained divided on two fault lines, namely, one under the domain of America’s capitalist doctrine, while some others sided with Russia’s socialist doctrine. Of course, the countries that remained neutral, opted to join the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) of which the maiden summit was held in Belgrade in 1961. Even the NAM, which had almost 120 UN members in its fold at its peak, saw a gradual decline of its relevance and influence ever since the collapse of the USSR.

America’s hegemonic mentality is the order of the day 

The world political landscape had a toll order following the collapse of the United Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) in 1991. Arguably, President Gorbachev’s untenable

Perestroika doctrine led to the downfall of the USSR and its 15 republics becoming independent states of the UN thereafter. Following the disintegration of the USSR, the USA asserted and consolidated itself as the world’s sole superpower, at the expense of the bi-multi-polar world that stood the test of time. The UN, on the other hand, suffered a trust deficit among membership, while its mandate was openly flouted by members of the UNSC willfully, with utter disregard to the well-established norms and ethos. As seen time and again, the UN succumbed to pressures of powerful states, placing its credibility, neutrality and independence at odds with its “global peacekeeper” role, supposedly in the absence of a counterweight to the USA, the likes of the USSR during the cold war period. Contrary to expectations, a majority of the UNSGs’ who led the UN since early 1945, often failed to live-up to their assertive roles, besides playing into the hands of powerful states – which audaciously and covertly ran the UN and its agenda as if it were their own backyard.

USA-UKs’ WMD duplicity exposed  

Recalling some of the alarming set-backs the UN suffered in recent times, one cannot help but wonder the rationale of the United States of America and the United Kingdom’s infamous legacy of waging a senseless war of aggression against Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan to name a few, which seemed hollow and in total violation of the UN Charter and its principles. Failure on the part of the UN to prevent a military onslaught and undue interference against member states, calls into question the UN’s inability viz-a-viz its dismal failure to stand by its members, thus endangering world peace and security by powerful countries at will. It’s bizarre on the part of the USA-UK to hoodwink the world – into believing a false notion of the Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) myth and the dastardly and unjust manner in which the so-called war of peace had been waged against sovereign independent members of the UN with impunity. The “Chilcot Report” tabled by the UK government on the war in Iraq is a case in point, exposing USA-UKs’ duplicity of going to war on the pretext of Iraq’s WMD myth with an iota of evidence to substantiate its WMD mantra.

Bane of arms race and global power rivalry 

The world’ top 6 militarized countries, namely, the USA, China, Russia, India, Germany, the UK have spent a colossal sum of US$ 1.4 trillion in 2025 on defense and security, of which the USA’s share alone was estimated at $900 billion, which is an all time high and mind boggling. Their security dilemmas often stem from perceived security threats of overt and covert nature, both within and outside national boundaries.  For 2026, the USA’s defense budget has shot up to $1.5 trillion, reflecting an alarming 66% increase from its 2025 ($900 billion) defense spending. This amount outweighs the total GDP of the 25 least developed countries combined. Certainly this indeed a colossal waste of funds, and is more than enough to feed the childern of the 25 least developed countries combined.

Armed conflicts at all time high – UN’s catastrophic failures 

Over the last few years, the world has witnessed a record number of armed conflicts reaching a historic all time high. Among others, Russia-Ukraine, Palestine-Israel, Ethiopia-Somalia to name a few, led to the killings and displacements of people in hundreds and thousands due to excessive and indiscriminate use of fire power with sheer brutality. On the otherhand, the absurdity of wars thrust upon Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan et al, and their disastrous consequences are emblematic of great power rivalries and their warmongering mindset. The recent massacres of unarmed children, women and civilians in Palestine numbering well over 50,000, once again have exposed UN’s persistent failures in protecting vulnerable communities, albeit its guilt and culpability, making a mockery of international law at the risk of undermining its own credibility. Indeed, the UN’s lame duck approach has exacerbated the status-quo, owing to its failure to prevent nation states from turning against each other and their own people. If the UN’s track record is anything to go by, its abysmal performance over the last 2-3 decades speaks for itself loud and clear. Simply put, one doesn’t need rocket science to understand the crux of the UN’s repeated blunders, which may warrant a course correction to make it more responsive and assertive so as to addressing the present-day challenges.

US withdrawal from Multilateralism rings alarm bells 

The recent US withdrawal from 66 UN affiliates and international agencies, namely, WHO, UNESCO, COP, UNHRC, Colombo Plan and a host of other UN and multilateral entities, came as a cropper and rude shock to the UN and member states. At a time, the UN is well short of badly needed statutory funding to carry out its mandatory tasks worldwide, the US withdrawal was least expected, viz-a-viz contrary to its long-cherished commitments. The impact is quite significant and will run counter to WHO’s capacity to deal with emergency situations, thus depriving vulnerable communities of essential medical supplies. Besides, it may alo signal drastic funding cuts, which often go hand in hand, with poverty-stricken developing countries.  If that’s not bad enough, one may recall the US withdrawal from WHO and its reduction of funding to UNICEF and USAID in 2020 when the entire humanity was reeling from COVID pandemic outbreak and its devastating consequences. The US’s funding cuts to UNICEF and USAID in 2020 too, resulted in similar catastrophic consequences. Regrettably, the UN is also confronted with a gamut of emerging threats and concerns, stemming from environmental pollution, transnational crimes, human smuggling, drug trafficking, money laundering etc, often impacting vulnerable segments of societies.

Reforming the UN, bottlenecks and stakes 

The UN is currently under intense scrutiny for a perceived crisis of legitimacy and efficiency. In essence, a plethora of vital issues confronting the UN remain unresolved, driven by geopolitical considerations, staffing problems, financial constraints, and complex global crises. As such, there lies an overarching urgency to reforming and revamping the UN and its affiliated bodies such as the UNSC, among others. Alas, the working of the UN and UNSC have not been reviewed since its inception in 1945, much to the criticism of member countries. In regard to resource constraints and overall performance, the UN faces an uphill task of restoring its status-quo, such as budget cuts in key humanitarian agencies leading to an erosion of public trust in the UN, staff and affiliates.

The UN’s systemic failures, inherent shortcomings and drawbacks have been flagged by member states time and again, with emphasis on the UN benchmarks and KPIs as regards implementation of projects and delivery of services worldwide. It is sad that although a global climate agreement was reached at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris, in December 2015, the progress has been stalled by nations withdrawing from key accords. Concerns have also been expressed on the lack of foresight and progress in regard to the goal of ending poverty and reducing inequality by 2030 (Sustainable Development Goals) despite the fact that a large portion of the global population still live in poverty facing economic insecurity.

Among others, the UN’s failure to prevent or mediate in major conflicts, namely, in Gaza, Ukraine, and Sudan has been a cause for concern. In regard to peacekeeping operations, the UN members and peacekeepers face challenges in adapting to modern conflicts, which are often protracted and involve non-state actors, needing clear, realistic mandates from UN and allied agencies. To put it in context, conflicts and proxy wars raging across parts of Africa, Europe, Middle East and elsewhere have been alarming with catastrophic consequences for people caught up in fighting. The number of refugees and displaced persons as of end 2025 stood at 70 million, which speaks for themselves, reflecting the sheer magnitude and complexity of the crisis before the UN. The member states have called into question the fate of the record numbers of refugees and displaced people who are at the mercy of the UN and its agencies.

The Global North-South Divide  

The Global North- South framework divides the world in to wealthier industrialized nations (North) and less developed, often poorer countries (South) highlighting disparities in wealth, technology, resources, and political power, stemming largely from the legacy of colonialism, resource constraints, impact of trade deficits, uneven global developments, and climate justice issues.  This framework entails understanding and analyzing the relative prosperity and international power of countries around the world. In fact, the UN ought to prioritize its framework for developmental with an emphasis on South-South cooperation in ernest, whereby, the deserving countries (often lagging behind in term of growth and progress), must be given priority and supported with financial aid, expertise, technical know-how, resources etc to the maximum, so as to harnessing their full potential and regaining their trust and faith in the UN and its programs.

Key takeaways – the Essence of UN, Multilateralism and Diplomacy  

1. The million dollar question before the world today is where would this power rivalries lead  to, and, who, in fact is in control of world peace and security, which seemingly in the hands of a few dictatorial states, least bothered about humanity and collective psyche and interests of people and nations at large.

2. There’s a growing body of opinion – advocating comprehensive reforms and overhaul of the UN, which is long overdue. The UN Charter and its agencies may be outdated in terms of its relevance and scope, paradigm shifts, latest trends and present day realities. As  such, the UN deserves a complete overhaul, mindful of the concerns and interests of members. Overall, there is a significant appetite for change, with many believing the current systems lack credibility among members, often experiencing procedural gaps in problem solving, strategic planning and execution of programs. The report presented by an expert committee in this regard has advocated, inter-alia, a system change so as to introduce new vigor and vitality to the world body with adequate safeguards, in order to make it more transparent, accountable, representative, inclusive, with a purpose-driven approach and framework, in its entirety. As such it is incumbent upon all UN members to wholeheartedly embrace and support the UN agenda viz-a-viz reforming and overhauling the UN and the UNSC, in commensurate with changing circumstances of the world order, which is the need of the hour.

3. The reforming of the UNSC remains high on the UN agenda, inter-alia, UN structures, strategies, applications, and so on. The expansion of 5-permanent-member veto-wielding UNSC too remains critical and timely, aimed at strengthening the UNSC decision making body, and induction of new members, in so far as meeting new challenges, problem solving, and addressing realities on the ground. There has been mounting criticism of the UNSC permanent members and their conduct, lacking credibility on the application of veto power sans purpose-driven criterion. As a matter of fact, all veto-wielding members must fully comply and fall-in-line with UNSC obligations and commitments in a spirit of shared and collective interest with no room for high-handedness and bias. It is proposed that UNSC 5-veto-wielding members be restrained from exercising their veto power, albeit, UNSC consensus viz-a-viz relavant protocols as the case may be.

4. The so-called arms race among the world powers has been a bane for world peace and security and is considered a trigger for like-minded countries to follow suit. In today’s world, most developed countries appear to be armed to the teeth for which they set apart a colossal portion of their GDP for the purchase of new arms and high tech equipment, besides spending a fortune for defense research & development. It’s a tragedy, the nuclear armed countries pose severest threats to humanity and for the peaceful coexistence of all living beings at large. As such, it is the utmost responsibility on the part of developed countries to trim their defense spending and divert such funds for the welfare and wellbeing of people of the developing countries for the sake of humanity.

5. Third world countries continue to suffer from life-long predicaments to deal with day-today challenges, yet, they invariably get caught up in a vicious cycle, negating any future prospects. Given the plight of third world countries in the midst of potential security nightmares, the UN should advocate adequate safeguards and security guarantees for weak nations, on the basis of their bona-fide-legitimate interests and concerns. Obviously, the fate of a good number of African countries hangs in the balance on the back of land disputes and wars of aggression pursued by resource thirsty warmongers, thus needing course correction as a top priority.

5. The time has come to say “enough is enough” to all warmongers, creating fear-psychosis, misery and peril on the people, on the whims and fancies of mediocre leaders. The arbitrary use of force against independent sovereign nations could set dangerous precedents, thus putting the UN and its member countries at odds with their legitimate rights and interests. At this rate, no country would feel safe and secure in the face of unjust hegemonic power ambitions of the few. The UN too appears to be in a state of flux, while countries themselves are at the mercy of none. In the circumstances, the UN and member countries cannot afford to remain silent and pose further. They ought to take a courageous stand in the best interests of all.

“The exhortation is not to return hatred for hatred but to conquer it by loving-kindness” – Dhammapada

*The writer is a retired Ambassador and Foreign Ministry Spokesman. He can be reached at schandrad@hotmail.com