The United Nations officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and a majority of other signatories. Up to this 2007, it's nonetheless an ineffective world's most outstanding diplomatic organization. So what are the causes of this drawback? The purpose of this article is to reveal the author's one personal thought considering this ineffectiveness.
Former U.S. Secretary of State, Madeleine K. Albright states: Bureaucratic, ineffective, undemocratic, anti-United States, and after the bitter debates over the use of force in Iraq, critics might add "useless" to the list of adjectives describing the United Nations. Well, I totally endorse to Albright's statement; in particular in term of ineffective and undemocratic. To me personally, among the causes to these organizational defects is " personal attachment of the United Nations officials to their home countries."
Article 1 of the U.N. Charter says that
"the purposes of the United Nations are (1) to maintain international peace and security ... (3) to achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respects for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion...
it's sufficiently clear that to achieve international peace and security, all United Nations officials need to be internationalists, not individualists, regionalists or patriots. I see among the obstacles to smooth debate amongst United Nations officials are that they're mentally attached to the interests of their nations. surely, patriotism is fine, since it's not contrary to any municipal laws, international laws, legal or non-legal rules; even so, the objectives of the United Nations are to obtain international interests that mean interests for all, so to obtain international interests, U.N. officials need to be internationalists.
To be patriots, you may need to be civil servant or public defenders of your countries, to be individualists; you may need to be staffs of private entities and to be regionalists, you may need to be employees of regional organizations, but, surely, not the United Nations.