As the UN turns 80, its relevance is under renewed scrutiny. The Security Council designed in 1945 to keep powerful states engaged via veto power now routinely stalls on crises such as Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan, mirroring geopolitical rivalries rather than forging global consensus. Smaller nations once optimistically viewed the UN as a platform for equitable representation, but the absence of permanent seats for regions like Africa, Latin America, and influential democracies like India has corroded that legitimacy. 

Realists argue that power politics, not ideals, drive state behavior. Indeed, key global actions like the 2003 Iraq invasion occurred without Security Council approval, exposing the limits of institutional authority.

Constructivist scholars add that selective norm enforcement—intervening for some crises while ignoring others undermines faith in universal principles and breeds cynicism in the Global South. As multilateralism fragments, nations increasingly turn toward alternatives like BRICS and the G20. Without meaningful reform—such as expanding Council membership and curbing veto misuse the UN risks becoming a relic rather than a resilient global forum.