The UN faces paralysis and a crisis of legitimacy as global power shifts accelerate, raising urgent questions about reform, alternatives, and Africa’s role.
The United Nations, the last anchor of the post-1945 world order, faces an existential crisis. Paralysis over Gaza and Ukraine, the weaponisation of sanctions against Iran, the collapse of the so-called Western ‘rules-based order’ and the increasingly untenable democracy deficit at the heart of the Security Council, pose hard questions about whether the UN has crossed the point of no return.
Meanwhile, alternative models are emerging, most notably China’s Global Governance Initiative, built on “sovereign equality”, “international rule of law”, and “multilateralism”. The parallels with the League of Nations in the 1930s are striking.
In Gaza, the Security Council has been unable to restrain Israel’s devastating campaign, blocked repeatedly by US vetoes. Ditto Ukraine, because of Russia’s veto. This is not simply gridlock: the Council’s structure entrenches the power politics of 1945, producing justice for the so-called Big Five rather than collective security. Maintaining diminished powers, such as the UK and France as veto-wielding powers, while ignoring a host of rising powers such as India, adds to the increasing global insecurity.
Iran perfectly highlights the system’s hypocrisies. Washington abandoned the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018, violating the Security Council endorsed agreement, then attacked Iran while supposedly negotiating a new agreement. Deploying incredible chutzpah, it now seeks to trigger ‘snapback’ UN sanctions, accusing Iran of violating the agreement which it first violated itself.
Beyond diplomatic and military power mind-games, the economic order initiated by the 1945 UN framework is also rapidly disintegrating. The Bretton Woods system, created to steady currencies and promote open trade, has withered. Institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO no longer guarantee predictability, with BRICS and SCO offering alternatives.
Tariffs, sanctions, and financial blockades have now become central tools of Western statecraft. The West has used its financial clout to freeze reserves and cut countries off from SWIFT. This has accelerated efforts to build alternatives: regional pacts, new payment systems, and non-dollar trade arrangements.
All this recalls the fall of the earlier League of Nations, which collapsed because it could not reconcile great-power politics with collective security. Nowhere was this clearer than in 1935, when Fascist Italy invaded Ethiopia. Emperor Haile Selassie’s appeal to Geneva was met with little action, exposing the League as irrelevant, despite his warning. The experience of the UN, born from that failure, suggests that history will rhyme, if not reiterate.
Attention must therefore turn to the General Assembly (GA), where every state has a vote and Africa holds the largest bloc. The GA cannot legally pass binding Chapter VII resolutions – that authority lies with the Security Council. Yet precedents exist. The Uniting for Peace resolution of 1950 gave the GA power to recommend collective measures when the Council was blocked.
Some argue the GA should be more radical, acting to break the veto if peace is threatened. Such a step would be revolutionary, but international law evolves through bold practice. If backed by overwhelming majorities, GA resolutions could acquire legitimacy that challenges the Council’s monopoly.
Africa’s numerical strength
Africa could drive this shift. With numerical strength, African states should unite around the principle that the veto cannot indefinitely strangle multilateralism. Even if great powers dismiss GA votes as ‘non-binding’, the symbolism would be immense: it would show the global majority refuses to remain hostage to a handful of post-1945 powers.
At the same time, China’s Global Governance Initiative, rooted in sovereign equality and multilateralism undergirded by international law, resonates with many in the Global South weary of Western dominance.
Whether it offers a true alternative or simply a vehicle for Chinese influence is open to debate, but its appeal is an indication of how far trust in the current UN-centred system has collapsed. Even here, given the continent’s current constraints in evolving its own system, Africa could still position itself between the industrial West and the ascendant South, serving as a bridge in the evolving order.
If, however, the UN is to be revitalised, Africa must assert its collective voice for durable reform. After all, the lesson of Haile Selassie’s 1936 appeal was that the collapse of collective security is a threat to all. Africa, once the canary in the coalmine, can now be the bridge. The question is whether Africa can fashion a collective voice and whether the world will listen!
