I have grown up in a world of violence and wars. My life is marked by these conflicts in a seemingly never-ending cycle of violence where diplomacy has failed. Should it not been for a strong, world organization, who is to say that we would still have a world. I see the United Nations as the focal point for world peace. Everything that comes and goes from the United Nations normally has the effect of calming down international flare-ups or easing inner-national tensions. Though the world's problems seem insurmountable; a part of the United Nations to me is the international councilor, the "person" that nations can turn to relieve disputes and to restore order to an uneasy Earth.
Though diplomacy sometimes fails, you never really hear about how the United Nations helps through hundreds of minor skirmishes. The World's attention is only bearing down on the United Nations in times of war, though due credit is not given when conflict is avoided. The Middle-East is a case in point. Tensions in the Middle-East have often been eased by the U.N. and its international peace makers, but we only hear about the suicide bombings of psychopathic terrorists, never peace accords or amends between countries. Another piece of the United Nations to me is the oftentimes thankless heroes who try to avoid conflicts or reduce the wars effects on the innocent people.
Often, after the tragedy of war, countries are left torn and tattered. People are homeless and without food or water. These pictures often hit us at home, thinking how lucky we are. Obviously, the United Nations provides care for these impoverish areas and tries to bring back normal ways of life to the populations, who all to often, are the ones really hurt by wars. That adds another part to what the United Nations means to me; the international good-doer who watches out for all of humankind. .
Now, having addressed what the United Nations means to me, it seems only fair that I address what it doesn"t mean to me.