The UN Secretary General recently submitted recommendations on reforming the UN, to the UN General Assembly.
The salient points have been neatly captured in the executive summary :
1. Freedom from want
2. Freedom from fear
3. Freedom to live in dignity
4. Strengthening the United Nations
All these are laudable initiatives. More than 50 years after its creation, the UN should be overhauled and brought to terms with the world as it is in this century rather than stick with a form created in 1945.
But there is one point in the recommendation that I am sceptical about. And thats the reform of the security council.
The securtiy council is a true representation of the post WW2 world. The security council is the prime candidate for reform and most tricky too.
Coming to a consensus on the kind of security council reform is one part of the problem. The major one is whether the UN would be able to function effectively if more countries were given seats on the council with considerable if not equal voice as the present council members.
The world witnessed the sharp differences within the council on the i.r.a.q conflict. The differences were so sharp that it prompted the sole super power to side-step the UN and ignore its call for restraint. All these differences have cropped up even though the council is populated with member countries that have a common global view point - to keep themselves in charge of the world.
What if tomorrow more countries like Brazil, India, Japan, Germany, South Africa, etc where given seats in the council. Will it not give rise to more fragmented opinion ? Some of us will argue that true global opinion will finally be reflected in the decisions of the council. But at what cost ?
The UN will be reduced to another league of nations, unable to take quick and binding decisions. It would then become fashionable for member countries in the council to disagree with the council and go ahead and defy the council.
The UN would become another NAM (Non-aligned movement) or Commonwealth, meeting occasionally and dishing out white papers and sermonizing.
The problem is not just with the UN structure. Its with the attitude with which the member countries, both within the council and outside, view the UN. When push comes to shove, no one really cares for what the UN says, their own interest is supreme.
Secretary General Kofi Annan should be addressing the attitude issue in addition to the present attempt at reforming the mammoth world body.
No comments:
Post a Comment