Replacing the UN with a new sans-China organization

[United Muscovite Nations]

The United Nations is a joke. It should be dismantled.

It's not, people just expect it to function as something it was never meant to function as.

[Ifreann]

I don't recall the Chinese government being represented in the UN at all.

Just some Maoist insurgents that people treat like legitimate world leaders for some reason.

Because for all practical purposes they are.

[-Astoria-]

So why not abolish the UN; and in turn, its sub-branch of the WHO; and replace them with a new organization beholden to everyone but the Chinese government, such that it could represent the world's interests more, and the Chinese government's interests less?

First question - is this idea realistic?

That's the first problem.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I don't recall the Chinese government being represented in the UN at all.

Just some Maoist insurgents that people treat like legitimate world leaders for some reason.

Wtf makes some Kuomintang rebels more legitimate than CCP rebels?

[Novus America]

The United Nations is a joke. It should be dismantled.

It's not, people just expect it to function as something it was never meant to function as.

But again what it is now is something very different than what is was intended to be. And it really does not do much. Certainly it does not stop members from fighting wars against other members or violating their sovereignty.

[-Astoria-]

Wtf makes some Kuomintang rebels more legitimate than CCP rebels?

Pro-tip: the KMT haven't been in power for the past four years - the more separation-centric DPP are.

[United Muscovite Nations]

It's not, people just expect it to function as something it was never meant to function as.

But again what it is now is something very different than what is was intended to be. And it really does not do much. Certainly it does not stop members from fighting wars against other members or violating their sovereignty.

It does however provide a forum to hammer out many disputes. Interstate violence is much lower now than it was at the time it was founded, it's not a total failure. But what people expect it to be is a sort of world parliament, and that's in violation of every principle of international law.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Wtf makes some Kuomintang rebels more legitimate than CCP rebels?

Pro-tip: the KMT haven't been in power for the past four years - the more separation-centric DPP are.

Great, so the current ROC government has never even stepped foot in China and doesn't even want to. Thank you for proving my point that the ROC-aboos are delusional.

[Diarcesia]

It's already called NATO

[-Astoria-]

Thank you for proving my point that the ROC-aboos are delusional.

What.

You could easily support it & still want independence from the mainland without having to step onto it.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Thank you for proving my point that the ROC-aboos are delusional.

What.

You could easily support it & still want independence from the mainland without having to step onto it.

I mean the people who view it as the sole legitimate government of all China.

[Novus America]

But again what it is now is something very different than what is was intended to be. And it really does not do much. Certainly it does not stop members from fighting wars against other members or violating their sovereignty.

It does however provide a forum to hammer out many disputes. Interstate violence is much lower now than it was at the time it was founded, it's not a total failure. But what people expect it to be is a sort of world parliament, and that's in violation of every principle of international law.

Rarely are disputes resolved via the UN. Usually it is via other avenues.
Moreover that is not even correlation let alone causality. Just because there is less interest violence now than WWII does not mean the UN was in anyway the cause.

Especially given interstate warfare was widespread up through the 80s. One cannot attribute the decline after the collapse of the Soviet Union to the UN.

And the UN was not originally intended to invite everyone in without qualifications. And it still excludes some places. It excluded Rhodesia on human rights grounds too.
In theory it has human rights standards to be a member. Obviously not enforced but the fact those exist show it was original intent that they apply.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I don't recall the Chinese government being represented in the UN at all.

Just some Maoist insurgents that people treat like legitimate world leaders for some reason.

Wtf makes some Kuomintang rebels more legitimate than CCP rebels?

The fact that the Republic of China never ended.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Wtf makes some Kuomintang rebels more legitimate than CCP rebels?

The fact that the Republic of China never ended.

It barely ever existed.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

The fact that the Republic of China never ended.

It barely ever existed.

It admittedly wasn't the most stable incarnation of a Chinese state, but one could easily argue that China never really has been stable.

[United Muscovite Nations]

It barely ever existed.

It admittedly wasn't the most stable incarnation of a Chinese state, but one could easily argue that China never really has been stable.

The ROC's governance of China was basically a warring states period. Not an incarnation of the Chinese state.

[North German Realm]

It admittedly wasn't the most stable incarnation of a Chinese state, but one could easily argue that China never really has been stable.

The ROC's governance of China was basically a warring states period. Not an incarnation of the Chinese state.

Meh, by that logic said warring phase hasn't ended yet, so China still has no official government.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The ROC's governance of China was basically a warring states period. Not an incarnation of the Chinese state.

Meh, by that logic said warring phase hasn't ended yet, so China still has no official government.

Taiwan was never a core part of China.

[Novus America]

Meh, by that logic said warring phase hasn't ended yet, so China still has no official government.

Taiwan was never a core part of China.

But then why is the PRC justified in treating it the way it does?
By claiming Taiwan the PRC completely undermines its claims to have unified China and ended internal conflicts...

[Christian Confederation]

Given the many UN members have fought many wars with many other members if the goal is peace the UN is not getting that.

And the WHO is NOT taking the lead in the Coronavirus case, it is largely marginalized with each country pursuing its own response, often and ignoring the WHO’s advice which changes anyways.

Remember the WHO said “no travel bans” initially, only to be ignored and once the PRC supported travel bans it did too. The WHO is not even run by a real doctor, but some corrupt politician from a regime not surprisingly very close to the PRC.
The WHO has been often ignored and widely criticized, and they deserve that.

But I do agree the question is in the title is over simple. Obviously we need to strengthen some alternatives to the UN that exclude hostile regimes, but the UN would presumably still exist as it does.

Just we need alternatives that work better as well, and those by necessity could not try to shoehorn completely incompatible states into the same box, or they would just end up the same place as the UN.

WHO is a joke. It can only work if ran by a board of great doctors. The CDC, EU, Australia, UK, Canada, And Japan.

A 11 member board with the CDC and European equivalent having permanent seats. 1 Chairman and 10 members, Chairman breaks any ties and acts as spokesperson, chairman and board members server staggered 8 year terms with the chairman serving 6 years with possibility to be reelected.

Let's ignore the China part and look at the rest of this.

[North German Realm]

Meh, by that logic said warring phase hasn't ended yet, so China still has no official government.

Taiwan was never a core part of China.

I'd question that argument considering the treaties after the second world war made it a "core part of China", but it's irrelevant given a state that controlled it as part of China has relocated there now, meaning it is part of "China" and as such the is one of the "warring states". If the RoC ever just starts rebranding itself as Taiwan and the PRC stops claiming it as "rightfully Chinese territory", I'll change my tone ig.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

It admittedly wasn't the most stable incarnation of a Chinese state, but one could easily argue that China never really has been stable.

The ROC's governance of China was basically a warring states period. Not an incarnation of the Chinese state.

Was there ever really a period of Chinese history that wasn't a warring states period?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Taiwan was never a core part of China.

But then why is the PRC justified in treating it the way it does?

Who ever said they were?

[United Muscovite Nations]

The ROC's governance of China was basically a warring states period. Not an incarnation of the Chinese state.

Was there ever really a period of Chinese history that wasn't a warring states period?

Most of its history, yeah.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

The ROC's governance of China was basically a warring states period. Not an incarnation of the Chinese state.

Meh, by that logic said warring phase hasn't ended yet, so China still has no official government.

The Chinese Civil War, much like the Korean War, never officially ended, therefor you're technically correct.

Was there ever really a period of Chinese history that wasn't a warring states period?

Most of its history, yeah.

In what universe? Not this one.