https://sputnikglobe.com/20250221/russia-china-could-pick-up-the-slack-if-us-quit-un-but-bodys-dissolution-would-trigger-conflicts-1121595737.html
Russia, China Could Pick Up the Slack If US Quit UN, But Body’s Dissolution Would Trigger Conflicts
Russia, China Could Pick Up the Slack If US Quit UN, But Body’s Dissolution Would Trigger Conflicts
Sputnik International
A group of Republican senators have introduced a bill to «terminate» the US’s membership in the United Nations, alleging that the body has «devolved into a platform for tyrants and a venue to attack America and her allies.» Sputnik reached out to a leading US international affairs observer to find out what’s wrong with the proposal.
2025-02-21T19:10+0000
2025-02-21T19:10+0000
2025-02-21T19:10+0000
analysis
earl rasmussen
us
russia
china
the united nations (un)
bill
conflict
dialog
platform
https://cdn1.img.sputnikglobe.com/img/07e9/02/15/1121596206_0:19:3000:1707_1920x0_80_0_0_83e6916528e4707f8b42282c33294190.jpg
«I think it’s a very poor recommendation,” international consultant and retired US Army Lt. Col. Earl Rasmussen said, commenting on the new bill, introduced in the Senate Thursday and dubbed the ‘Disengaging Entirely From the United Nations Debacle (DEFUND) Act.The US was a key founding member of the UN, and its withdrawal “would be very potentially damaging to the organization,” Rasmussen said.Obviously, a US pullout would require relocating the UN out of New York City, ideally to a neutral country, the observer noted.In any case, a UN-type body is vital, Rasmussen stressed, recalling the sad fate of its predecessor, the League of Nations, and emphasizing that “there needs to be a mechanism for dialogue, and that’s essential. You can’t be a spoiled brat throwing a temper tantrum if you don’t get your way.”Besides security and dialog, Rasmussen says the UN’s other work can’t just be thrown out as well, pointing out the the body has «done a lot of things on the human rights side, medical assistance, food and issues with famine, conflicts with rebel-type groups that they’ve been able to come in and act as a kind of peacekeeper» with. If the UN disappeared, «it would diminish access to a humanitarian support.»The US, which accounts for about a third of the UN’s budget, isn’t the only power expressing gripes with the international organization, with Russia and other BRICS powers calling for its comprehensive reform into a more inclusive body, particularly at the Security Council level.Last October, the BRICS’ Kazan Summit Declaration reaffirmed the need for «comprehensive reform of the Untied Nations, including its Security Council, with a view to making it more democratic, representative, effective and efficient, and to increase the representation of developing countries in the Council’s memberships so that it can adequately respond to prevailing global challenges and support the legitimate aspirations of emerging and developing countries from Africa, Asia and Latin America…to play a greater role in international affairs.»
https://sputnikglobe.com/20250221/lavrov-lauds-trumps-policy-of-pragmatism-for-abstaining-from-uns-anti-russia-resolution-1121595457.html
russia
china
2025
News
en_EN
https://cdn1.img.sputnikglobe.com/img/07e9/02/15/1121596206_0:0:2688:2016_1920x0_80_0_0_b84f765de78977294e409c1cfe916d3f.jpg
is the un good or bad, what use does un have, do we need the un
is the un good or bad, what use does un have, do we need the un
A group of Republican senators have introduced a bill to «terminate» the US’s membership in the United Nations, alleging that the body has «devolved into a platform for tyrants and a venue to attack America and her allies.» Sputnik reached out to a leading US international affairs observer to find out what’s wrong with the proposal.
The US was a key founding member of the UN, and its withdrawal “would be very potentially damaging to the organization,” Rasmussen said.
“Would it be able to survive? I think it could. I think you’ve got China and Russia providing strong leadership. I don’t know what the influence of France and the UK [would be, ed.]…because they usually vote however the United States wants,” he added.
Obviously, a US pullout would require relocating the UN out of New York City, ideally to a neutral country, the observer noted.
In any case, a UN-type body is vital, Rasmussen stressed, recalling the sad fate of its predecessor, the League of Nations, and emphasizing that “there needs to be a mechanism for dialogue, and that’s essential. You can’t be a spoiled brat throwing a temper tantrum if you don’t get your way.”
Without it, there would be “more tensions, potentially more conflicts around the world,” he warned. “If the UN did dissolve, I think then it would be up to great powers to individually kind of oversee regions of influence and work out their differences to address some of the different conflicts that would occur, and the disasters that might occur to respond to as well.”
Besides security and dialog, Rasmussen says the UN’s other work can’t just be thrown out as well, pointing out the the body has «done a lot of things on the human rights side, medical assistance, food and issues with famine, conflicts with rebel-type groups that they’ve been able to come in and act as a kind of peacekeeper» with. If the UN disappeared, «it would diminish access to a humanitarian support.»
