My progressive friends may “go bananas” over this thought, but I believe the U.S. should contemplate withdrawing from the United Nations.
Yes, it is “radical” but what does this once very useful organization do for the U.S? I would argue it has become too big and bureaucratic, and divisive to get anything of substance done.
All the while its buildings and diplomats are perched in Manhattan without having to pay a penny for rent or normal expenses. Even though there are over 100 nation members the US pays 30 percent of the UN’s huge budget. We the American taxpayers contribute mightily to rent, housing and programs instituted by the United Nations.
But more importantly the programs the UN promulgates are for the most part deeply flawed. For instance, in 2018 we withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council. Why? Because many of the members of that council were human rights violators. They are Cuba, China and Venezuela, a trio that has more human rights violations between them than the rest of the world together.
We as a nation said good riddance to that committee. I think we should do the same with the entire UN. In examining their five core missions, I don’t see where they are succeeding at one.
First and foremost, the core mission is to maintain international peace and security. How is that going now? Currently, two wars are being fought and there is angst that one of them may blow up into a worldwide conflict. I don’t see the UN lifting a hand to negotiate peace in Ukraine, and the middle east powder keg is well beyond their means to stop.
In fact, since its existence 75 years ago, they haven’t resolved a single “international crisis” permanently. Some would argue their involvement only prolongs conflict and give opposing sides time to re-arm and re-group.
You probably don’t know there are currently fourteen separate “peace keeping operations” going on in the world. The cost for these operations is just south of $7 billion. A pretty pittance you might say for efforts that have mostly failed.
Their second core mission is to protect human rights. This has been made extremely difficult when you have the bad actors- Cuba, China and Venezuela in charge. They are compromised because their own houses our cesspools of human rights violations.
Thirdly, the UN is expected to deliver humanitarian aid. I think the UN tries mightily to see that the right people get humanitarian aid and sustainable development. However, the problem is that aid and development takes place in countries that are ruled by despots. Often times aid and development helps to line the pockets of the ruling class, and those that really need it are left out in the cold literally.
You can’t blame the UN for trying. It was a lofty goal back when it was established. Its predecessor, the League of Nations, failed at preventing World War ll, and it was thought that the UN could succeed where the League failed. However too much bureaucracy and too many disparate interests, make their job untenable.
It was a wonderful idea at its inception, but it has not succeeded. It will not succeed. There is no sense throwing taxpayer money at it when it is doomed for failure.
Although there is truth in what you are saying the suggestion that the US should remove itself from an organization that brings most nations into a common forum is isolationism at it’s worst. What are we going to do with that money we save? From past experience it doesn’t go to those that need it. Just those that want more. We have already devolved from a country that was a world leader to a country that our allies can’t count on. For whatever it’s faults it’s better than the alternative. I’m guessing NATO is next on your list.