The United Nations is often criticized as a bureaucratic organization overly focused on process rather than on making substantive decisions and ensuring that member states follow through on them. As former UN system staff members, we acknowledge that this dynamic can indeed occur, particularly on a bad day, when a lack of overall vision and diverging interests among the big powers or groups of states reduce the UN to a mere talk shop, with little impact on the real world.
With the Summit of the Future (SOTF) and other major meetings to be held at the UN General Assembly in September, we propose a fresh start for the UN, its member states and their leaders. We offer three key recommendations that we believe could revive multilateralism and improve the usefulness of the UN, enhancing the 58 “actions” included in the latest draft SOTF outcome:
Re-Establish Conflict Resolution Processes
The primary purpose of the UN remains “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” Conflicts like the ones in Ukraine and Gaza have been left for too long to the direct belligerents and their respective allies. Under international law, the peaceful settlement of disputes is paramount, with several options specified under Article 33 of the UN Charter. This does not mean disregarding the territorial integrity of nations or the self-determination of people. Rather, it involves a step-by-step approach where the parties can air their grievances and claims before an impartial entity with the authority to hear and settle the case.
Fact-finding in disputes, whether amid comprehensive conflict resolution efforts or on a case-by-case basis, is among the crucial functions of a neutral third party and can deter escalation. Allowing contradictory claims to linger — such as those concerning attacks on civilians or the destruction of infrastructure — benefits the most extreme elements of the adversaries, who may escalate beyond self-defense and restitution toward aggression or even genocide, as recently witnessed in the Middle East, Ukraine-Russia and Sudan.
Due process encompasses many components, including providing each party the opportunity to state their claims, present defenses and lay out the facts and evidence supporting their positions. Due process is supported by the general principles of law and is reflected in the statutes of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. It also applies to nonjudicial dispute resolution methods, such as mediation, arbitration and conciliation, where equal rights are afforded to the adversaries in a balanced process conducted by impartial mediators.
In fact, the steps required for due process already set in motion the de-escalation of a conflict, since enabling the adversaries to air their respective grievances and get engage with each other through an impartial third party has proven to be an effective violence-interruption method. Due process underpins the legitimacy and effectiveness of the UN and should not be dismissed as mere bureaucracy or unjust egalitarianism.
Join Forces to Implement the SDGs and Address Existential Threats
Promoting “social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom” is another critical pillar of the UN that requires concerted action. The 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) constitute the only collectively agreed path to a dignified life for all human beings on a healthy planet. Achieving these goals by 2030 requires political will, collaboration and resources. Instead, the diversion of scarce resources to armaments, increased developing country indebtedness and the failure to fulfill commitments for official development assistance and climate finance are worsening the situation, particularly for the poorest and most vulnerable populations. Any remaining trust in multilateralism and collective action is being squandered, leading to extreme conditions of want, suffering and radicalization.
Beyond reiterating general commitments, world leaders must specify the sources and amounts of financing required and their management to deliver on human resilience and well-being. We propose the creation of a Global Resilience Council by the General Assembly and/or the Economic and Social Council, bringing together member states, relevant organizations and nonstate actors to ensure a full multilateralist response to existential threats such as climate change, pandemics, the unforeseen consequences of AI and a malfunctioning global financial system.
Cut Down on Ideology and Be Serious About Human Rights
In a world rich in diversity, attempting to impose homogeneity is a recipe for disaster. The growing tension between “democracies” and “autocracies” is fueling current and emerging geopolitical confrontations, adding an unhelpful element of ideological rigidity. Framing global politics as a struggle between “good and evil” overlooks the shades of gray inherent in human nature and governance, idealizing certain models while demonizing others. Whether the criteria emphasize liberty or the delivery of services, they tend to become straitjackets for the respective populations.
Governments are expected to perform well in both protecting individual liberty and delivering services to individuals and society as a whole. Given the different starting points for each member state, the world’s governance systems cannot be expected to align in every respect. However, this should not be used as an excuse by any government to shirk its obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other established human rights instruments. There must be a renewed recommitment to the principles and mechanisms that monitor their implementation.
We call on world leaders gathering in New York in just a few weeks to unite around these three key recommendations, encouraged and supported by Secretary-General António Guterres, so that the Summit of the Future can be a true turning point for multilateralism and the collective interest of humanity.
This essay included contributions from other members of the Peacemaking Reflection Group of former UN system staff (PRG), among them Ingeborg Breines, Kerstin Leitner, Jordan Ryan and Gary Slutkin.
This is an opinion essay.
We welcome your comments on this article. What are your thoughts on reviving multilateralism?
Related Posts
Paola Bettelli is a member of the Peacemaking Reflection Group, part of the Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability.
![[Re]Group - A Playbook for Turbulent Times -Subscribe Now](https://passblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/regroup-v2_unf2026_square_600.500@2x.webp)
Very very good, as his is the answers to our worlds problems faced today as one world for all in peace and developments.. also for all, including our insekts and animals world wide
Three important points but not essential in terms of reviving the UN because the first issue making the UN ineffective is the P5 in the Security Council, as demonstrated recently with the war on Gaza where US vetoes have killed any hope to end that conflict. On the issue of conflicts resolution which is from my perspective not a proactive attitude, it would be better to have a strong conflict prevention structure which could help the world to minimise conflicts and address root causes before they even start. The component about human rights has many dimensions depending on which political structure is talking about it as we see e.g. for the Western world there is no human rights in other parts of the world. But many observers have noticed that for the same Wester world the life of a Ukrainian has more value than the life of a Palestinian or a Burkinabe. Therefore the revival of the UN needs deeper changes as democracy, human rights, equality and justice should be applied to and within the UN itself.
Dr. Camara. Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I agree with you that conflict resolution is not the only solution and that it ought to be paired with a strong conflict prevention structure. Unfortunately, for the conflicts which are currently raging in the world, and which this article sought to address, the prevention stage expired a long time ago. I also concur with you that human rights ought to apply to everyone, everywhere, which in theory they do. Part of the United Nations’ mission is to advocate for these rights and to support countries in introducing them into their national norms and legislation. I appreciate your reply and interest.