REFORM IS THE ONLY WAY TO RESTORE ITS PRESTIGE

United Nations Day is not merely a celebration of the establishment of an international organisation; it is an occasion to reaffirm the ideals of world peace, human rights, justice, equality and cooperation among nations—ideals that inspired the creation of the United Nations in the aftermath of the devastation of the Second World War.

When the UN Charter came into force on 24 October 1945, the world placed its hopes in a new international order in which dialogue would prevail over war, cooperation over confrontation, and justice over the brute force of power.

Today, however, as the world grapples with multiple wars, terrorism, geopolitical rivalries and humanitarian crises, serious questions are being raised about the role, impartiality and effectiveness of the United Nations.

When an organisation expected to uphold international justice, itself comes under a cloud of suspicion, a process of introspection becomes imperative. It would be unfair to overlook the achievements of the United Nations.

It has provided a common platform for international dialogue, established global standards of human dignity through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and sought to restore stability in several countries through peacekeeping operations.

Its various agencies have made significant contributions to global health, child welfare, education, refugee assistance and sustainable development.

Yet the fundamental question remains: has the United Nations succeeded in fulfilling its most critical responsibilities—preventing wars, effectively curbing terrorism and ensuring equal treatment for all nations? The experience of recent years offers no reassuring answer.

The greatest weakness of the United Nations is evident in the structure of its Security Council. The veto power enjoyed by the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom often becomes an instrument for safeguarding their national interests rather than advancing global peace.

Whenever decisive action on a war or humanitarian catastrophe is blocked by geopolitical rivalries, the declarations and appeals of the United Nations begin to lose their moral authority. Conflicts such as those in Gaza, Ukraine and Syria have sharpened the question of whether an organisation entrusted with maintaining international peace is genuinely capable of playing a decisive role.

The irony is that while the world has changed dramatically, the UN’s decision-making framework remains largely shackled to the same old balance of power.

A recent controversy concerning Dawood Ibrahim and his criminal syndicate, D-Company, has further raised questions about the credibility of the United Nations.

A report by Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, described D-Company as an “India-based” criminal syndicate. On 21 October 2026, India strongly objected to this description before the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly, calling it factually incorrect and damaging to the organisation’s credibility.

Indian representative Raghu Puri referred to Dawood Ibrahim’s history of involvement in terrorist activities and the relevant facts recorded in the UN sanctions list.

He emphasised that Dawood is a wanted fugitive in India and, according to India, is residing in Pakistan. This controversy is serious because factual accuracy and impartiality must be paramount in matters as sensitive as terrorism. Incorrect or incomplete information about the geographical origins or base of a terrorist organisation is not merely an error in a report; it raises questions about the credibility of international counterterrorism efforts.

While a mistake in one report cannot justify dismissing the entire work of the United Nations, it is essential to ensure that such errors are investigated, corrected and accompanied by appropriate accountability.

The independence of Special Rapporteurs is important, but independence cannot mean freedom from factual scrutiny or responsibility.

The United Nations must ensure that human rights allegations against countries are backed by credible evidence and impartial assessment. Terrorism victims and innocent people affected by counterterrorism operations deserve equal consideration.

Applying different standards to perpetrators, sponsors and victims of violence risks undermining the organisation’s credibility and impartiality. Another major challenge confronting the United Nations is the unequal representation of nations and regions.

Despite the growing global importance of countries such as India and the increasing influence of Africa and Latin America, comprehensive reform of permanent membership and the veto system in the Security Council remains elusive.

Without a structure that reflects the contemporary political, economic and demographic realities of the world, it will be difficult to make the United Nations more democratic, representative and legitimate.

The United Nations must prioritise counterterrorism cooperation, ceasefires, humanitarian access and equal enforcement of international law. Meaningful reform requires transparency, factual accuracy, official accountability and impartiality.

Curbing veto power misuse, expanding Security Council membership and eliminating double standards are essential to restoring the organisation’s credibility and effectiveness.

As the world faces war, terrorism, violence, humanitarian emergencies and growing distrust, United Nations Day offers an opportunity to renew commitment to peace, coexistence, human dignity and cooperation.

The UN must demonstrate that it serves justice and security for all, not powerful nations alone. Its responsibility is to prevent wars, combat terrorism and advance peace. Its credibility will depend on impartial, effective action during crises, not declarations alone.

Restoring its founding spirit requires equal justice for every nation, institutional accountability, freedom from bias and structural reforms to preserve the organisation’s relevance.