Foreign Affairs46%
How to Save the UN From Irrelevance 30%
By Rafael Mariano Grossi0%
7/9/2026, 4:00:00 AM
BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Framing Effect, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 27.1% saturation with 437 hits. Analysis detected 3,577 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,610 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 40.1% and a BS Rank of 30% (14,519 of 20,568 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 70.60% of the article peer group.
How to Save the UN From Irrelevance
Ending the Peacekeeper’s Paralysis
Rafael Mariano Grossi
United Nations Headquarters, New York City, June 2021 Andrew Kelly / Reuters
RAFAEL MARIANO GROSSI is Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
More by Rafael Mariano Grossi
Print Subscribe to unlock this feature or Sign in .
Save Sign in and save to read later
Article link: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/how-save-irrelevance https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/how-save-irrelevance
This is a subscriber-only feature.
Subscribe now or Sign in .
Chicago Cite not available at the moment
MLA Cite not available at the moment
APSA Cite not available at the moment
APA Cite not available at the moment
Request reprint permissions here .
The UN cannot be expected to prevent or end every war, but working toward that end is its core task.
It can again become a capable, impartial, and present broker for peace.
Failing to be in the room where it happens creates disillusionment and puts the UN on a path to irrelevance.
Institutions that cannot explain where they add value become vulnerable to indifference, and indifference in the current climate is not a passive condition—it is actively eroding the UN’s finances and political will.
The UN has a liquidity crisis, which, at its core, is a crisis of confidence in the institution by its member states.
The most immediate action that the international community can take to address this crisis of confidence is in its choice of the next secretary-general, for which I am contending.
History suggests that a more active secretary-general, who goes into the field to prevent conflict and who is present at tables where diplomatic solutions are negotiated, can be effective, even in a deeply divided world.
The United Nations should focus on reducing the conditions that produce crises rather than mainly responding to their consequences.
Doing so requires a renewed focus on facilitating peace, development, and human rights as mutually reinforcing priorities.
Throughout the Cold War, UN secretaries-general supported member states in preventing conflict and finding paths to de-escalation when it occurred.
As the historian Thant Myint-U wrote recently in Foreign Affairs , the quiet diplomacy of his grandfather, U Thant, as secretary-general helped end the Cuban missile crisis in the 1960s.
The man who filled that role two decades later, Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, facilitated diplomatic solutions for conflicts in Cambodia and Central America.
As history has shown, secretaries-general can build off-ramps from which exhausted belligerents can exit a conflict and establish conditions that help prevent a future crisis.
To measure up to this task, the next secretary-general will need to be a facilitator, preserving communication, conveying messages, clarifying positions, and working persistently across divides to reduce the risk of misunderstanding and escalation.
This requires patience, discretion, political courage, and a willingness to speak to all sides when others cannot or will not.
It also requires a person who has already built up the rapport and support needed to open doors.
Building those relationships starts long before the negotiation table comes into play.
It is through active work in support of international security, development, and human rights that trust and the foundations of peace are laid.
When it comes to development, the gap between collective ambition and delivery has grown too wide.
A significant proportion of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, aimed at alleviating poverty, improving health and education, reducing inequality and environmental harm, and supporting sustainable economic growth, are off track or regressing.
Financing is constrained, debt burdens are rising, and aid budgets have been slashed by a third.
When states cannot provide basic services, and as repeated external shocks erase their development gains, people stop believing that their lives can improve, and social cohesion suffers.
The UN secretary-general needs to be a realist.
The UN’s response to these trends must be practical.
Working alongside the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and other development banks and institutions, the UN’s distinctive contribution is its unique legitimacy, universality, and ability to place development within a broader political and human context, which allow it to give voice to the countries most exposed to the consequences of economic dislocation.
This external support is most effective when it helps unlock domestic potential, enabling investment, strengthening institutions, expanding access to energy, and building the infrastructure that allows societies to participate in the modern economy.
Here, the secretary-general serves to understand member states’ priorities and to act on that information, creating opportunities, mobilizing civil society, and attracting private partners for joint ventures.
Two technological forces are reshaping the path to development as the world has known it.
First is the uneven arrival of the energy transition.
Access to energy remains the precondition for a functioning modern economy; without it there is no modern health system, no competitive industry, and no digital economy.
But the countries least responsible for the conditions driving the need for the energy transition are often those least equipped to finance that shift.
A transition that is unaffordable or that fails to provide more reliable energy access to those without it will not endure.
Artificial intelligence is also changing the reality of development, concentrating productive capacity and raising questions about labor, access, and military risks.
The office of the secretary-general may not be able to resolve these challenges, but it can ensure that they are considered in the context of the development and that the states most exposed to the consequences are present when decisions are made.
The protection of human rights and human dignity remains at the core of the United Nations’ purpose, but it cannot be treated as a pillar detached from the realities of peace and development.
Rights are most effectively protected where there are functioning institutions, credible economic opportunities, and stability.
When those foundations are weak, rights become vulnerable.
The defense of human rights cannot rely on declarations and reporting mechanisms alone but must also target the conditions that enable those rights—state services, the rule of law, and inclusive institutions.
When things go wrong, whether because of natural or manmade disasters, the United Nations must continue to play a role in supporting and coordinating rapid and effective humanitarian action.
The office of the secretary-general, however, needs to focus on prevention.
Last resort assistance is a costly substitute for conflict prevention and sustained investments in development and effective governance.
To advance peace, development, and human rights in a more fractured world, the UN secretary-general needs to be a realist, recognizing the central and enduring role of national interest.
This is not a cynical observation; it is a rational one.
States can be best encouraged to support a durable international order when their interests overlap, risks are shared, and cooperation can serve sovereignty rather than weaken it.
The Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges once wrote, “ No nos une el amor sino el espanto ,” meaning, “It is not love that unites us but fear.”
States may disagree profoundly on core issues but still know that escalation, nuclear proliferation, pandemics, financial panic, or technological disruption would harm them all.
The founders of the UN understood this, having just survived the most destructive expression of such forces.
Their achievement was to create a framework in which politics could be managed in a way that averts catastrophe.
That vision can be restored not by idealizing a UN that pursues utopian harmony but by striving for a more practical UN that works steadily and credibly to support peace, enable development, and protect human rights.
Some reform efforts are already underway.
The UN80 debates, which aim to make the institution more cost effective and accountable, are a step in the right direction.
But the underlying problem undermining the UN’s effectiveness is too complex for any single process to address.
Decades of lax management and diffuse priorities have led to the expansion of the UN’s mandates and produced overlapping agencies, duplicative processes, and reporting cycles that consume institutional energy without producing measurable results.
The system has become heavy on declarations and light on achievement.
A more effective UN would concentrate on what only it can do: convene parties that would not otherwise meet, sustain dialogue when political trust has collapsed, and ensure that the states most exposed to global risks have a voice in managing them.
That requires not just a restructuring of the organization but an assessment of the breadth of the agenda, making way for results that are visible to the people the UN exists to serve.
The secretary-general alone cannot reform the UN, resolve every conflict, and eliminate every ill.
The office cannot command armies or override member states.
But it does have a convening authority that it can use to foster diplomacy, responsibly and with courage.
And that authority is squandered by absence.
The next secretary-general must show up at the frontlines of war, in communities in need, wherever the mission may call.
Presence is the job.
Whether it is fear or shared interests that bring states to the table, they need to find the United Nations already there.
International Institutions
How Europe Can Get Putin’s Attention
The Continent Must Overcome Its Russia Predicament
Build a Palestinian State
How to Fulfill the Promise of Self-Determination and Stabilize the Middle East
Ilan Goldenberg and Liam Hamama
The Strong Do What They Can—and Suffer What They Must
What Thucydides Really Thought About Power
The Transatlantic Alliance Can’t Survive Without Trust
Washington Dismisses NATO’s Value at Its Own Peril
The Ukraine Lesson Taiwan Keeps Missing
It’s Not the Drones—It’s Everything Around Them
David Petraeus and Clara Kaluderovic
Iran’s New Grand Strategy
How a Remade Islamic Republic Will Reshape the Middle East
Narges Bajoghli and Vali Nasr
And the Convenient Fiction of Continued Menace
Speakers
8speakers7.8%attributed speech1,484writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Selected voice
100%flagged-word coverageJorge Luis Borges
28 attributed words22% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.