The United Nations

In 1945, in the wake of the destruction of World War II, the leaders of China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States (the U.N. Security Council) met with their counterparts from 22 nations to create the United Nations.

Read this article, which describes the many goals and activities of the United Nations, which include offering international conferences and international observances; promoting arms control and disarmament; human rights, humanitarian assistance, international development, and peacekeeping; helping broker treaties; and helping to enforce international law.

Reforming the UN

Overview

Since its inception, there have been many calls for reform of the United Nations. However, in recent years – especially with the new millennium – calls have increased from nations and civil society alike that UN reform is necessary for its survival. Clearly, some reforms would require a change in the UN Charter. For some nations, such as the Permanent Five in the Security Council, even proposed additions to permanent UNSC membership are hotly debated. For others in civil society, the issue is that "rearranging the furniture" already in the house is nowhere near the kind of reform really required by the UN.

Conceptually, some NGOs frame the issue of whether the UN should be the premier intergovernmental association or the preeminent international peace organization. That question addresses whether the UN should exist for the benefit of the member states and their national interests or, with the growth of non-state actors in contemporary international affairs, whether civil society at large, seen transnationally, is ultimately whom the UN should represent and protect.

If the answer is the latter, that the UN should focus on peace and not the needs of nation-states per se, then its structure should change significantly to match the reality of a changing world in which peace and security are multidimensional, with increasing input from non-state actors as well as from traditional nation-states.

In this view, if the UN cannot reform in the direction of securing peace under contemporary conditions, it eventually could be superseded by an entity that adapts itself appropriately to the times and pursues comprehensive global peace, inclusive of non-state actors, in particular, incorporating the religious dimension. Only this way, proponents say, can peace be secured for succeeding generations. Although reform of the General Assembly and Security Council are necessary, that will not be sufficient to enable the UN to fulfill its peace mandate. Advocates of this view note that former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan himself, while still in office, recognized that "far-reaching institutional reforms" may be needed by the UN. Annan told the General Assembly on September 23, 2003:

Excellencies, we have come to a fork in the road. This may be a moment no less decisive than 1945 itself when the United Nations was founded. At that time, a group of far-sighted leaders. . . were determined to make the second half of the twentieth century different from the first half. They saw that the human race had only one world to live in, and that unless it managed its affairs prudently, all human beings may perish. So they drew up rules to govern international behaviour, and founded a network of institutions, with the United Nations at its centre, in which the peoples of the world could work together for the common good. Now we must decide whether it is possible to continue on the basis agreed then, or whether radical changes [emphasis added] are needed. And we must not shy away from questions about the adequacy, and effectiveness, of the rules and instruments at our disposal. [11]

He repeatedly urged members to seize a "once-in-a-generation opportunity" to reform the UN, or decisions avoided today will adversely affect this and future generations. Specifically, Annan said that among what needs to be examined is the "functioning of the major organs of the United Nations and the relationship between them" and recommendations of "ways of strengthening the United Nations, through reform of its institutions and processes."

Among far-reaching suggestions for UN reform are broadening membership beyond nation-states to include non-state actors from civil society and the creation of a new UN interreligious body that would serve as an "upper house" to the General Assembly (and its executive arm, the Security Council).

Representatives to this council should be ecumenical, regardless of profession, and able to further a universal, transnational vision of peace. Advocates of such a council say small but meaningful progress has been made in this direction, beginning with GA Resolution 59/23, passed in November 2004, which noted the relevance of constructive interreligious dialogue and action to the prevention of armed conflict, and as a necessary basis for harmonious exchange and cooperation. [12]

Philosophically, proponents say that if the spiritual dimension of human affairs is not adequately considered in the UN and its activities, the UN cannot comprehensively address the entirety of human affairs as they affect peace and security. Their argument is that it was when the global community was stirred to preserve and protect human life and dignity that the UN and derivatives, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, came about. It is illogical, in this view, to exclude that dimension of human affairs, and most other proposals for UN reform fall far short of what is truly needed to make the UN effective and revitalized.

Secretary-General Annan created the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, which issued a 2004 report containing over one hundred recommendations, but few that could be characterized as bold or far-reaching insofar as the UN's structure is concerned. [13]

In 2005, the United States established six priorities for UN reform:

  1. Budget, Management, and Administrative Reform
  2. Establishment of a Peace Building Commission
  3. Replacement of the UN Commission on Human Rights with a Human Rights Council (achieved in 2006)
  4. Democracy Initiatives and the UN Democracy Fund
  5. Adoption of a Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism
  6. Support of Good Governance, Sound Economic Policies and Development

The document also states:

The United States is open to UN Security Council reform and expansion, as one element of an overall agenda for UN reform. We advocate a criteria-based approach under which potential members must be supremely well-qualified, based on factors such as: economic size, population, military capacity, commitment to democracy and human rights, financial contributions to the UN, contributions to UN peacekeeping, and record on counterterrorism and nonproliferation. We have to look, of course, at the overall geographic balance of the Council, but effectiveness remains the benchmark for any reform. [14]



Form of International Organization

One ongoing debate has involved world governance in general. Historically, there have been three basic conceptions of international organization:

Federalism: This view advocates some degree of world government imposed from the top down. The UN would act like a state with the power to pass and enforce laws and to tax. This view is promoted by Citizens for Global Solutions (formerly the World Federalists) and articulated in the book World Peace Through World Law by Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn. There has been much fear that a world government would trump national sovereignty and become a world tyranny.

Functionalism: This view believes that certain functional activities need international cooperation and standardization; for example, international aviation, international postal delivery, and an international environmental protection agency. Ernst Haas's Beyond the Nation-State: Functionalism and International Organization (ISBN 0804701873) elaborates on this view. Many of the specialized UN agencies, like WHO, operate in this way.

Transactionalism: This view maintains that world organization will develop from the bottom up through the development of a world culture based on exchanges and transactions as people of different countries engage in commerce, travel, and forms of interaction. This view was articulated by Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye. [15]



Method of Representation

Representation is a major problem for the UN. First, many member states do not feel that they are properly represented on the Security Council or in the General Assembly. Second, many people throughout the world do not feel they are represented at the UN.

Security Council. The UN Security Council represents only 13 of the 192 member states, and among those 13, five have permanent membership and veto power. Most states feel they do not have a voice in the Security Council, the only UN organ with real military and police power to enforce its decisions. As the world power structure at the time of the UN's founding recedes into the background, its structure decreasingly reflects world power realities.

Many proposals to reform the Security Council have been offered, including regional representation, eliminating the veto power and permanent status of the five members, and increasing the size of the Security Council. There is a strong feeling that Japan (and perhaps India and Brazil) should become permanent members, but at the P5's insistence, without veto power.

General Assembly. The membership of the General Assembly is composed of governments, and there is no direct election of representatives by popular democratic means. The General Assembly gives every government one vote. Thus, an island nation of 12,000 inhabitants has the same vote as China, which has 1.3 billion people. Small nations can numerically overwhelm large nations and make decisions that can serve a few people at the expense of many. Proposals for reform include proportional representation based on population and a bicameral assembly.

A Forum of State Leaders. As a forum for governments, many people feel the UN supports regimes, not people. In many nations, dictators represent only their own self-interest or the interest of their ethnic group. Decisions that support such regimes are often viewed by oppressed peoples as collusion by the UN. In this view, while the organization can stand for international human rights in theory, its structure actually supports human rights violations in practice. Proposals for reform include increased recognition of NGOs and civil society and parallel organs like the previously discussed interreligious council that would speak on behalf of the dispossessed and equal opportunity and justice for all people.



Failures to Act or Maintain Security

The UN has had difficulty in carrying out several of its peacekeeping efforts, evoking comparisons to the weakness of the ill-fated League of Nations. This was apparent in 2003 by the controversy surrounding the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, conducted in the face of strong disapproval by a majority of members; by Iraq's converse direct defiance of UN weapons and humanitarian resolutions; and by Israel's decade-long defiance of resolutions calling for the dismantling of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. These perceived failures stem from the UN's structure, which emphasizes the sovereignty of nations' voluntary membership and places force in the hands of the Security Council, not the membership at large. Here are some examples of failures:

  • Failure to act during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, when then Secretary-General Kofi Annan oversaw peacekeeping forces there.

  • Failure by the UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (UNSC Resolution 1291) to effectively intervene during the Second Congo War, which claimed the lives of nearly five million from 1998–2002 (with fighting reportedly continuing), and in carrying out and distributing humanitarian relief.

  • Failure to intervene during the 1995 killings in Srebrenica (Bosnia and Herzegovina), despite the fact that the UN designated it a safe haven for refugees and assigned 600 Dutch peacekeepers to protect it.

  • Failure to successfully deliver food to starving citizens of Somalia; the food was usually seized by local warlords instead of reaching those who needed it. A U.S./UN attempt to apprehend the warlords seizing these shipments resulted in the 1993 battle of Mogadishu.

  • Failure to prevent the ongoing genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan, which reached its peak in 2003.

The extent to which the United Nations should act as a world government with more power to intervene in national disputes is under continuing debate. It relates to the issues of whether the UN Charter can be reformed or even a successor organization should be created. In 2005, the secretary-general proposed that the Security Council clarify the circumstances under which it would use force.


Politicization of the United Nations

Self-policing has been difficult at times for the UN. The nature of the General Assembly structure, with one vote per nation regardless of the size or qualifications of nations, has led to the politicization of well-intended efforts. For example, the prior inclusion on the now-defunct UN Commission on Human Rights of such nations as Sudan, Cuba, and Libya, which demonstrably have abysmal human rights records, and Libya's chairmanship of that commission, essentially stymied much human rights activity and made the commission itself illegitimate. The commission was replaced in 2006 by the UN Human Rights Council (see above).

The issues of the UN's failure to protect security and politicization put before the world the more difficult issue of how to effect change. The underlying questions still need to be looked at more seriously and responded to through international action:

  • Is the process of change more effective through inclusion or exclusion? Do punishment and exclusion work, or do alternate ways need to be found to "bring into line" those nations and leaders who scoff at international pressure?

  • Should we be appealing to humanity's higher capacities by focusing on ideals sought and how to get there rather than digging again through problems and ascribing blame?

  • What is the key methodology for the UN in its pursuit of peace?

  • What resources are currently underutilized and ignored that need to be understood, included, and strengthened?


The nature of the above questions, highlighted by NGOs seeking more radical UN reform, points the way to solutions that include consideration of morality, ethics, and the practical benefits of utilizing the moral authority of religions for peace.


Financial Waste and Scandals

The lack of checks and balances and transparency within the UN has led to financial waste and scandals. An example is the Oil-for-Food Programme established by the UN in 1996 and terminated in late 2003. It was intended to allow Iraq to sell oil on the world market in exchange for food, medicine, and other humanitarian needs of ordinary Iraqis, who were adversely affected by international economic sanctions placed on the government.

The goal of the sanctions was to prevent the Iraqi government from rebuilding its military in the wake of the first Gulf War. The Oil-for-Food Programme was curtailed amidst allegations of widespread abuse and corruption; its director, Benon Sevan of Cyprus, was first suspended, then resigned from the United Nations after an interim progress report [16] of a UN-sponsored investigatory panel led by Paul Volcker concluded that Sevan had accepted bribes from the former Iraqi regime and recommended his UN immunity be lifted to allow for a criminal investigation. [17]

Under UN auspices, over $65 billion worth of Iraqi oil was sold on the world market. Officially, about $46 billion was used for humanitarian needs, with additional revenue paying Gulf War reparations through a compensation fund, supporting UN administrative and operational costs for the program, and paying costs for the weapons inspection program.

Also implicated in the scandal was then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, whose son, Kojo, was accused of having benefited from illegally procured UN Oil-for-Food contracts on behalf of a Swiss company.