Does UN have power?

Musing over my handouts in GLOBDEV about “People and Power,” I thought of finding out what power looks like using the United Nations (UN) as an example. Based on the “power-over” model, the United Nations doesn't seem to have the power because they don't use violence to impose their will to other people or to other nations. The several interventions that they made
in the past are not considered as “threat or use of force” because their role during those interventions are that of being a peace-keeper. On the other hand, based on the “power-with” model, the United Nations seem to wield power because it has already made several resolutions that were pulled together by different member-states that “achieved a common goal.” Based on Italian political theorist Antonio Gramsci's “hegemony”, or “the power as the authority of agents to create and enforce rules,” the United Nations seem to lag power on this one, especially after several failed attempts to implement its resolutions in the past. One example of this is when they passed a resolution prohibiting the United States to invade Iraq, which the US deliberately ignored anyway. Lastly, based on the “power-as-if” model, the United Nations is evidently powerful because it has managed to create “facts on the ground” like the beneficial services that UNESCO, WHO and other agencies under the United Nations has brought to a lot of people across the globe inspite of not really being a state in itself.