UN peacekeepers were alleged to have abused women and young girls as well as engaging in forced prostitution The failure to resolve the dispute among members of the UN Security Council over the invasion of Iraq dealt a substantial blow to the international legal order.
As a result, the UN has become regarded as at best an ineffective body powerless to prevent the more powerful nations from interfering in other countries or, at worst, a willing collaborator in this process.
This perception has led to an increased targeting of the UN and its personnel.
The killing of 22 people and injuring of a further 100 during the assault on the UN office in Baghdad in 2003 removed any idea the organisation might have had regarding the relative immunity of its personnel. The attacks continued through the decade culminating in the assault on a UN guesthouse in Kabul in 2009, which resulted in 12 deaths.
In 2013, 33 UN peacekeepers and 25 civilians and associated personnel were killed, an increase of 21 on the 37 killed the previous year.
So how can the UN address this situation? First one must remember the UN is not an independent entity. Its member states decide what it can and cannot do.
In the case of resolving conflicts or peacekeeping missions, the five permanent members of the Security Council more or less control the decision-making process and have the right to veto any resolution.
Many of the UN's problems can be traced to the failure of the global community, particularly the wealthier nations, to allocate sufficient funds to support its programmes.
Issues such as these must be confronted, not only by the UN but perhaps, more importantly, by its member states, if the organisation is to realise the heady dreams of international peace and co-operation of the early 1990s.
Justin Frewen is a Wanganui-based United Nations consultant, who has served the UN on humanitarian missions for almost 20 years.
