Is the UN irrelevant? According to the hawks in the US government and many commentators this is so. Britain and the US, two of the founding members, are at the moment taking action that is not only outside the UN but opposed by the Security Council. Certainly if core members do not feel bound to follow the UN, then the future does indeed look bleak.

　　The seriousness of the situation though is not as severe as some suggest. In the UN's history of half a century it has sanctioned only three conflicts including the First Gulf War and the recent Afghan conflict. Compare this number to the actual amount of conflicts that have taken place over the same period.

　　During the Cold War the council was even more divided than now, paralyzed by the tensions between the two opposing blocs. In the past, unilateral action has been taken but there was not as much talk of the UN failing like the League of Nations did.

　　What makes the current situation different is the focus that has been given to events at the UN, and how so much hung on the outcome of UN weapons inspections. Since last September when US President George W. Bush stated that he would work through the UN, some attempt was made by the British and Americans to do so. But they abandoned the UN after months of intense diplomacy without any hope ofshavingsUN sanctioning a war. Why did they invest so much time, energy and money?

　　While the UN may look impotent at a casual glance, the organization is, in fact, a strong though subtle force in world politics. The actions of Britain and the US in trying to convince the Security Council demonstrate how important the UN is today.

　　Opinion polls confirm this. Across Europe and America surveys found that public opinion shifted quite considerably depending on whether the war had a UN mandate or not. It is clear from the interest people around the world have shown in what happens at the UN that a great many people consider the UN not only important but a vital part of international politics.

　　Undertaking war is far more risky for the governments in the "Coalition of the Willing" without the sought-after second resolution. Signs of this are present in the mass demonstrations creating chaos in cities across the world - in San Francisco 1,000 were arrested in one day. Many governments find it hard to support the US without a second resolution.

　　Out of the "Coalition of the Willing" 15 of the countries do not wish to be named for fear of a public backlash.

　　The actual fighting itself has been affected by the lack of a second resolution. Turkey's government would probably have been more open to allowing US troops to use its territory if the conflict had been authorized. US troop deployment was hampered by war protests at Shannon Airport in Irelandswheresthey stop-over on their way to the Gulf.

　　A great many people believe in the "unique legitimacy", as Kofi Annan put it, conferred by the UN. It carries a heavy and influential moral weight that, while it can be bypassed for the present, cannot be ignored.