In 1994, nearly 1 million Rwandans were slaughtered in a government led effort to cleanse it's ethnic minority for irrational fears of a power vacuum. What followed the genocide were years of "regret" from nations for failing to intervene as the death toll soared in the African nation — chief among them the US, who could've saved hundreds of thousands from their untimely deaths. The failure of then president Bill Clinton and other world leaders to strengthen the United Nations peacekeepers still has lasting effects in the region which suffered mass depopulation, a crippled economy and a health crisis as a result.
What's relevant about the genocide 23 years later is the dire need still for international governance in areas where people suffer most. Take for instance the current ethnic cleansing occurring in Myanmar led by the Burmese government, where already over 400,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled their destroyed communities to take refuge in neighboring Bangladesh. This is where the UN could be most effective, but like with the escalating crisis that led to the Rwandan genocide, little has been done.
The United Nations has become an administrative body of ideological bureaucrats rather than a unified council that can agree on morally sound policies. The intent of this global institution is very necessary but its reach depends on interactive leadership. Donald Trump's first ever address to over 190 nations at the UN General Assembly did the opposite, and his isolationist threat-laced speech only promoted relationships to sour.
The Iran Deal, North Korea, Paris Accord, and the UN itself have been mismanaged by the president and the timing for his destabilizing "America First" agenda couldn't be worse. The UN and US lack the leadership that can work beyond criticisms for global conflicts similar to places like Myanmar or Rwanda, where there rest of the world's nowhere in sight.