The UN offers the most opportunity in its ability to influence international public opinion. World conflicts are discussed on a world stage with a world audience. However, that does not guarantee that conflict can be prevented or that peacekeeping is a simple exercise.
In fact, one of its most inclusive experiences to date involved engaging in conflict. The UN served as a focal point in arranging a coalition of nations to counter Iraq’s invasion and occupation of Kuwait in the early 1990s. Thirty-four nations, under the auspices of the Security Council, provided the military forces necessary for “Operation Desert Storm” and drove Saddam Hussein’s forces out of Kuwait. President George H.W. Bush’s claim of a “New World Order” as a result of the outcome did not come to pass.
Peacekeeping can be a very dangerous enterprise and can be of short duration or for decades. As of October 2003, one thousand eight hundred and forty one peacekeepers had died since the inception of the UN; 252 of those deaths occurred in 1993. In October 2003, there were 13 peacekeeping missions in operation: two in Asia, three in the Middle East, three in Europe, and five in Africa. Two of those had been in operation for decades ⎯ the one at the India-Pakistan border began in 1949 and UN peacekeepers have been in Cyprus since 1964. It seems that the goal of durable peace may be hard to achieve.
Other Conflicts
While the Security Council has the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, the Security Council itself is not entirely peaceful. After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Security Council speedily adopted a resolution that obligated member countries to ensure that terrorists would be brought to justice. However, the dissension among Security Council members regarding the appropriate action to take against Iraq subsequent to September 11 was newsworthy and unresolved. Some members wished to continue to try to settle the matter peacefully through diplomatic means. However, in the end the United States and its allies took non-sanctioned action against Saddam Hussein. It remains to be seen whether this has caused an irreparable breach in relations or damaged the power and prestige of the UN. The UN Security Council has implicitly accepted the situation by adopting resolutions indicating their willingness to become involved in the process of stabilizing a post-war Iraq.
The structure of the Security Council, funding, and priorities are also a source of conflict within the UN. While the UN provides an infrastructure system that transcends national borders, thereby encouraging international solutions to world problems, many smaller countries argue against domination from the larger nations, particularly from the Security Council’s permanent membership.
In reaction to pressure from a number of nations, including the United States, the UN launched a reform movement in the late 1990s. Discussions on financing, operations, and Security Council makeup continue, but many times to the frustration of the smaller countries. These frustrations are best expressed by quotations taken from the speeches made during the September 22 to October 7, 1997 debate of the General Assembly on UN reform. (2) The following quotes illustrate the frustration with the power of the Security Council, the use of the veto, and the lack of transparency in its actions:
“If reform of the [Security] Council is to be truly comprehensive and consistent with the spirit and realities of our time, then we must seek to remove — or at least, as a first step, restrict — the use of the veto power. Democracy in the United Nations is a mockery if the voice of the majority is rendered meaningless by the narrow interests of the dominant few.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Malaysia, HE Dato’ Seri Abdullah bin Haji Ahmad Badawi)
“We also believe that real reform of the Security Council should aim above all at ensuring that decision-making machinery and processes have the transparency, effectiveness and pluralism that must characterize every democratic institution. This includes, among other specific measures, the limitation of the veto power of the Council’s permanent members, and for timelier and more effective action to prevent international conflicts at the request of any State Member of the Organization.” (President of the Republic of Ecuador, HE Mr. Fabian Alarcon Rivera)
“We would similarly like to see certain restrictions placed on the use of the veto. We understand that all efforts at restructuring and reform in the United Nations, however, should be focused on economic growth and development. In addition, my country is calling for a reversal in the diminishing role of the General Assembly. The accountability of the Security Council to the General Assembly must be re-emphasized, and the General Assembly should more actively assert its role in the maintenance of international peace and security.” (Chair of the delegation of Antigua and Barbuda, HE Mr. Patrick Albert Lewis)
“In the era of democracy, transparency and proper management that we are claiming for our countries, there is nothing more normal than to insist, together, on the same values and principles in this Organization which unites us.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Algeria, HE Mr. Ahmed Attaf)
“Belgium, together with a number of like-minded countries that share the general concern with regard to strengthening the authority of the Security Council, ... advocate[s] an increase in both permanent and non-permanent members, greater regional representativeness, enhanced Council efficiency and a limitation of the right of veto. The right of veto is incompatible with the general interest. It should be possible to modify the decision-making mechanism so as to avoid recourse to this instrument, which has become entirely obsolete. Belgium also pleads for more transparency and closer cooperation between the Security Council and countries contributing to peacekeeping operations.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Belgium, HE Mr. Erik Derycke)
Another source of dissension among UN members is the direction of the UN toward goals than are not so directly related to maintaining peace and security. The United States withheld its dues for a number of years in protest regarding UN policies and charges of administrative waste within its programs. The dissension concerning the funding and priorities of the UN is illustrated in the following quotes drawn from the same debate, in which implicit reference also is made to the United States and other member countries withholding of funds from the UN: (3)
“The situation of the United Nations social sphere is the most worrisome. The greatest burden of the Organization’s budgetary crisis has fallen upon the bodies involved, whose financing has dropped by many millions of dollars during the present decade. ... In a world where 1.3 billion people still survive on less than a dollar a day, in a world where, for the price of one combat plane, 57,000 children in Africa can be fed for a year, it is impossible to conceive of a reform of the United Nations whose priority is not to strengthen the work of its institutions and programmes dedicated to social issues.” (President of the Republic of Colombia, HE Mr. Ernesto Samper Pisano, also Chair of the Non-Aligned Movement)
“... the eradication of poverty throughout the world should be the main goal of the international community's coordinated efforts in the coming years. The globalization of the economy cannot be limited to the use of cheap labour in the developing world, the proliferation of profitable investments and the exploitation of certain markets. It should also aim at providing coordinated and systematic assistance to immense populations whose only experience of globalization has been their poverty and frustration.” (President of the Republic of Ecuador, HE Mr. Fabian Alarcon Rivera)
“While we are deeply engaged in this process of reform we must not lose sight of the fundamental goals that impelled us to undertake it in the first place: to enhance the Organization’s ability to foster development and to address the root causes of poverty and conflict. Reform should not become a euphemism for budget slashing or an excuse for certain Member States to renege on their financial obligations to the Organization.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, HE Mr. Ali Alatas)
“Jamaica also endorses the need for measures to improve efficiency, and we have no quarrel with reform to streamline and rationalize the system. In welcoming these steps, we must however emphasize that reform is not synonymous with cost cutting. Reform is not about doing less; it is about doing better.” (Prime Minister of Jamaica, The Right Honourable Percival James Patterson)
“The current financial situation has no link with the assessment system. The way to deal with it is by making full, timely and unconditional payments of the assessments the General Assembly assigns to Member States. ... The financial crisis of the Organization should not lead us to take decisions that distort the spirit of reform we share. Carried to the extreme, this logic would call for the designation of Ted Turner as a permanent member of the Security Council, with the right of veto. By the way, we appreciate Mr. Turner's generosity.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico, HE Mr. Angel Gurria)
“It cannot be justified that some countries unilaterally pay less than their legally binding share, or nothing at all. Non-payment is unacceptable. How can those of us who always make a point of paying in full and on time, without conditions, expect our citizens and taxpayers to continue financing free riders?” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Norway, HE Mr. Bjorn Tore Godal)
“If the United Nations is to be reformed and made effective, then adequate financing is a matter of top priority. We therefore appeal to all Member States to pay their dues in full, on time, and without conditions.” (First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uganda, HE The Honourable Iriya Kategaya)
“Reform should not become a euphemism for budget slashing or an excuse for certain Member States to renege on their financial obligations to the Organization.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, HE Mr. Ali Alatas)
It is apparent that considerable concern exists over the funding, the organization, and the role of the UN but does that mean that it has failed?
The Future
Even in the face of frustration, it appears that most members continue to believe that the UN still represents the world’s best opportunity to create a climate of communication and dispute resolution across national borders, and to promote worldwide well being. They recognize that the UN has had notable success in a variety of areas including disarmament contributing to both the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (1996), the promotion of democracy, the improvement of world health, and the resolution of conflicts within and between member nations. The Millennium Declaration of 2000 set out goals for the UN in key areas including, among others, peace, security and disarmament; economic development and poverty eradication; environmental protection; and human rights.
The following quotes drawn from the same debate as the previous quotes illustrate the ongoing commitment to and belief in the UN as the best chance for effective international cooperation: (4)
“The General Assembly is a unique body in international institutional machinery. In it, representativity is practically universal. States participate on an equal footing without regard for their size or power, and the ideal of international democracy attains its clearest expression, at least in formal terms. The decisions of this body have great moral and political force and accordingly, it is essential to formulate them better and make them more timely.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uruguay, HE Mr. Alvaro Ramos)
“The United Nations has an irreplaceable role in a world that still combines forces of integration and cooperation with forces of disintegration and aggression.” (Minister of External Relations of Brazil, HE Mr. Luiz Felipe Lampreia)
“Where else but at the United Nations can we deal with the truly global issues such as the new security threats of uncivil society, environmental degradation, violations of human rights and poverty? Given the nature of these issues, unilateral, bilateral or even regional efforts are of course good, but not enough. Not even the most prosperous and powerful nations on earth can successfully solve them alone. Only the United Nations has a global mandate and global legitimacy.” (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland, HE Ms. Tarja Kaarina Halonen, now president of Finland)
Will the members continue to support the UN, join forces and seize the opportunities to revitalize the UN ⎯ a “unique and universal instrument for concerted action in pursuit of the betterment of humankind” as Kofi Annan requested (5) or allow it to go the way of the League of Nations?
Review Questions
- What is the difference between mediation and negotiation? Can you find an effective use of each by the UN?
-
Based on the quotes given, how would you classify the General Debate on Reform in terms of conflict management styles?
-
If reform does occur, how do you think the reform will be perceived ⎯ lose/lose, win/lose, or win/win?
- What suggestions might you make to the UN to improve communication and conflict resolution?
You Do the Research
- What does the most recent Security Council resolution about Iraq indicate regarding the UN’s involvement in that area?
- In how many peacekeeping operations is the UN currently involved?
-
Has there actually been any reform of the Security Council since the General Debate on Reform in 1997?
- How many member countries are currently in arrears in their payments to the UN?
- What are the current issues on the UN agenda?
Case Endnotes
- The United Nations home page, http://www.un.org. All information was drawn from this source unless indicated otherwise.
- “Selected Quotations on the Subject of UN Reform,” http://www.globalpolicy.org/reform/quotes.htm.
- Ibid.
- Ibid.
- Ibid.