ABSTRACT:

After the end of bipolar world order, many internal conflicts broke out in different parts of the globe. This changing nature of conflicts made it imperative for the UN to launch a new era of humanitarian interventions into domestic affairs, state sovereignty etc. The period also provides an opportunity for the international community to realize the regulation of international conflict through the UN structure. At the same time, the US retained the status of world’s most powerful nation in terms of militarily and economic capabilities. However, the US has been inconsistent towards the UN vis-à-vis in helping to maintain international peace and stability. Instead, it has used the UN and many other organisations associated with it only to serve its interests. There are instances wherein UN is used to legitimise US direct or indirect military interventions in many parts of the globe and also instances wherein US has failed to achieve its desired outcome through UN against such interventions. Many scholars like Anna Cornelia Beyer describe global governance as a product of American leadership, so it can be viewed as hegemonic governance. Wherein Mearsheimer and Joseph Nye argue that, the USA is not a true hegemon because it has neither the financial nor the military resources to impose a proper, formal, global hegemony. Thus, the paper attempts to analyse the nature of the post-cold war world order, whether it can be viewed as US Hegemony.  Further, the study will examine the possibility of restructuring the UN in order to respond the challenges faced by it.