International organizations are ultimately useless in solving the world’s problems. Discuss. Following the Second World War which saw death and destruction in an unprecedented scale, world leaders, determined not to let such horrors horrors repeat, convened to establish international organizations in hopes of achieving a more peaceful, secure and prosperous world for all. 50 years onwards, we witness their dreams and ideals embodied in international organizations like the nited !ations, the World "ealth #rganization and World $rade #rganization. %lthough these international bodies are undoubtedly far from perfect, it would be unfair to claim that they are ultimately useless in view of their signi&cant contributions to the goal of a better, more prosperous prosperous world. 't is understandable why some would claim that most international organizations are failures. (ery often, such organizations, despite their public advocation, fail to achieve any actual impact. %n often) criticized organization is the nited !ations *!+, which was established to achieve global peace, security and cooperation. ut despite boasting an e-tensive membership of more than 00 member nations, the ! has often found it hard both in terms of making signi&cant decisions and enforcing them. For instance, despite having ! peacekeepers in the country, the ! was unable to stop the /wanda genocide in 112 that resulted in the death of tens of thousands. 3ore 3ore recently, the !4s inaction towards the massacre of civilians by the Syrian government, the indiscriminate bombing of alestine by 'srael as well as the /ussian /ussian Federation4s repeated incursions and provocations toward kraine drew much criticism from the global community. ut to claim that such failures are solely due to the failures of the ! and other international bodies over)simpli&es over)simpli&es the situation. #ften, the reason why such international organizations fail to achieve signi&cant results is due to the fact that states are primarily interested with their own national interests instead of global stability. stability. %s a result, decision)making is di6cult because these state actors will always decide based on their own interests, making collective action and consensus buidling e-tremely e-tremely di6cult. Furthermore, even when most of the countries agree, international organizations still &nd themselves powerless to e7ect change due to the concept of national sovereignty 8 which claims that nations reserve the sole right to decide on domestic issues. ecause of these inherent problems and limitations, it is no wonder then that international organizations organizations often &nd their hands tied when facing global problem p roblems. s.
"owever, it is certainly not fair to generalize all international organizations as complete failures as there are plenty of organizations that have been successful in achieving tangible improvements to the world. %n e-ample would be the World "ealth #rganization *W"#+, which was established to improve global health and sanitary conditions. 'n the past decades, the W"# has drastically improved global health standards. !ot only has it increased worldwide awareness about diseases such as 3alaria, %'9S and $uberculosis, it has also managed to reduce the incidence of such diseases and even eradicate some. $he W"#4s litany of achievements include the eradication of small po-, the near) eradication of polio, as well as the global reduction of %'9S by :; since <00. 'n view of such signi&cant and tangible improvements of global health, ' belive it would be a gross in=ustice to claim that the W"# has been a complete failure. %nother of such organization is the World $rade #rganization *W$#+, which was established to promote free trade and global economic cooperation. %s of today, the W$# supervises more than 15; of total global trade. 9espite occasional allegations of favouring developed countries and its inability to stamp out protectionism, the W$# has signi&cantly changed the global trade landscape. $hrough promoting a global environment conducive for free trade, the W$# has allowed nations to grow economically and bene&t from increased trade connectivity. % prominent e-ample would be >hina, where millions were catapulted out of poverty as a direct result of its economic growth when it =oined the W$#. >loser at home, Singapore, a small nation devoid of natural resources, has also relied on a fair and free global trade environment for her growth and survival in the past 5 decades and will continue to do so. $o common consumers, perhaps the easiest way to e-perience the bene&ts of W$#4s work is to walk into a supermarket where we can en=oy goods from all over the world at the convenience of our doorsteps. ltimately, we have to realise that we live in an imperfect world with imperfect institutions. %lthough these institutions may lack e7ectiveness we desire due to the various limitations imposed, these limitations are often important and necessary because they prevent abuses of power and an overstepping of authority by such international organizations. /egardless of their e7ectiveness in achieving change, these international organizations are signi&cant because they represent the ideals and dreams of our forefathers 8 that a more peaceful, harmonious and prosperous world is always within our reach.
