May I make a suggestion for the United Nations Organisation: Where each nation attends to its own domestic affairs, the international community suffers when one country has made a serious error in judgment and has voted into office a dysfunctional person who abuses his mandate (like Stalin, Nixon, Idi Amin, and a host of other incompetent heads of state, and some of whom were “placed” there by the Americans like Pol Pot, Marcos and Saddam Hussein). Other countries, through UN Peace-Keeping, end up either trying to keep the peace or fighting someone else’s domestic war.
The United Nations therefore, has the right to claim an imposition of a criteria of what a country’s leadership should be. One criterion that comes to mind is an education in civil service (Hitler, for example, only had a high school education and George W. Bush was a C-student).
Therefore, those vying for the post as their nation’s leader must conform to this United Nations guideline. A system of checks and controls shall ensure that these leaders have a continuing sense of community.
In order for this idea to be acceptable to all nations, the United Nations Headquarters must move to a neutral country in Europe. Likewise, the defence capabilities of all countries must be under the United Nation’s supervision.
The United Nations can be a strong organisation if it takes on the responsibilities of one. The solution suggested here may not be foolproof nor will it guarantee that leaders will be up to par, but guiding the communities of the world on what makes a leader is a significant role that the United Nations should play.