International Relations in the New Era of Global GovernanceIn June of 1999 the Stanley Foundation sponsored the Thirty-Fourth United Nations Conference of the Next Decade. Their topic was "Global Governance: Defining the United Nations' Leadership Role." The Stanley Foundation is a private foundation. It strives for secure peace with freedom and justice. The foundation pursues its mission through diverse programs that are intended to provoke thought and encourage dialogue on international relations and world affairs. The foundation is currently working in the area of the United Nations and multilateral affairs, including United States relations with the UN and the related work of nongovernmental organizations and international philanthropy. The Stanley Foundation's web site is www.stanleyfdn.org. At the November unit meetings, we will discuss some aspects of international relations at the end of the 20th century with a particular emphasis on the United Nations and the new concept of global governance. (These unit meetings are not part of a study, but are only for information and discussion purposes.) The material below was taken from the report of the Thirty-Fourth Conference. We will use the Conference's definition of global governance. Governance is the sum of the many ways that individuals and institutions, both public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken. Global governance includes traditional governments and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). It includes economic and market entities such as multinational corporations, commercial and trade activity, and the global capital market. It includes nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and citizen movements, which have come to be called civil society. It includes global mass media and communication. All of these interact to form the intricate tapestry of global governance. Traditional national power and sovereignty are increasingly complemented by market forces and the networking of civil society. The growing gap between the world's rich and poor, the ongoing destruction of the environment, and the continuing violation of human rights all pose moral challenges, but they are also now very much linked to international peace and security. Peace and Security Peace and security were the central purposes--perhaps the primary motivation--for establishing the United Nations. The UN has had significant successes in peacemaking, in traditional peacekeeping where there has been a negotiated peace to keep, and in humanitarian assistance. However, the nature of conflict has shifted from classical international wars of aggression to a pattern of intransigent civil wars and ethnic conflicts. The world is still debating the issues of whether to intervene, how to intervene, and when to intervene in this type of conflict. The Article 2 UN Charter limitation on intervention in matters within the "domestic jurisdiction" of a nation is being weakened by growing support for international intervention in cases of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. Yet, there is no reliable system of international security today. Too often, inconsistent standards are applied. Some situations are ignored while others receive attention. Too often, decisions have been reactive and too late. Too often, decisions made with good intentions have failed because of muddled mandates and grossly inadequate resource commitment Another central reason for creating the UN was arms control and disarmament. Yet, the world is much more heavily armed today than it was at the end of World War II. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a major concern. Conventional weapons loom large in international commerce and are distressingly abundant in areas of conflict. Military expenditures divert needed resources from development, sustainability, and the alleviation of poverty. Discussion Questions How can the growing body of international laws and conventions be enforced with fairness and justice? What can we learn from the Kosovo experience? How can the international community make peace and security decisions more wisely? How can these decisions be enforced more effectively? What is the appropriate role for the United Nations? For regional organizations such as NATO? Poverty and Development Poverty is a significant cause of conflict. Sustainable development programs--including technical assistance, loans, and development grants--are intended to alleviate poverty, disease, hunger, illiteracy, and environmental degradation. This is a daunting challenge. The World Bank is the central IGO in this area. It and the various regional banks provide technical assistance and finance significant development activity. Much development work is delivered through contract arrangements with NGOs, who become the direct service providers. Private-sector direct foreign investment in developing countries has grown rapidly, and is now several times the total development investment through intergovernmental programs. This private direct foreign investment sometimes seeks areas of economic opportunity which may or may not be in areas where development is needed. Discussion Questions What should be the UN role in promoting development and alleviating poverty? What are the appropriate roles for national governments, the private sector, civil society, and other IGOs? Human Rights The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been a major force in promoting and protecting human dignity. Since it was written, significant strides have been made in establishing respect for human rights. NGOs have played a significant role in monitoring and calling attention to human rights violations. The greatest progress has been made in civil and political rights. The International Labor Organization continues its work of many years on labor and employment standards. International formal agreements have been developed on such issues as racial discrimination, torture, genocide, the rights of the child, and elimination of all forms of discrimination against women. The United Nations has had a major role in humanitarian and refugee work. Various UN representatives have carried responsibilities of monitoring, calling attention to difficulties, and mobilizing and coordinating relief and humanitarian efforts. Again, resource availability is often a limitation. As a recent example, the relief resources for Kosovo refugees have been inadequate. Discussion Questions How do we assure continuing progress in the promotion and protection of human rights? What should be the role of the UN? How does this conflict with national prerogatives? How should NGOs be involved? The United States and the United Nations The Conference report made the following comments about the relationship between the US and the UN: The singular importance of the US to the development of global governance and to the role of the United Nations is uncontested. The overwhelming influence of the US results from the current distribution of power in the international system and from the unique historical role of the US in pushing for the establishment of the organization and in shaping the Charter's principles upon which it is based. Recognizing the disproportionate impact of US decisions on the UN, participants at the conference were particularly critical of the US for undermining the capacity of the UN to fulfill its true potential. The group saw the arrears problem as the most glaring confirmation of US hostility toward the UN, but many argued that the US $1.6 billion debt to the UN was a symptom of a larger problem. Some defined this problem as simple arrogance: "The United States thinks that because it stands taller, it can see further and should thus control any organization it belongs to." Others pointed to a deep-seated distrust of government in the US, whether at the national level or at the international level. In the end, the group came to the conclusion that it was a fundamental ambivalence toward multilateralism in general, and the UN in particular, that plagued US relations with the UN. While public opinion polls have consistently shown strong US support for the UN, this support, as one participant observed, "is a mile wide and an inch deep." It is easy for strong-willed interest groups and single-issue politicians in Congress to commandeer US policy in support of their crusade against the UN or in favor of unrelated issues. While the Clinton administration is favorably disposed toward the United Nations, most participants saw the administration as not willing to invest much political capital in support of the UN. Other foreign policy objectives have higher priority. At the same time, the administration frequently turns to the UN to back its policies in, for example, Iraq or the former Yugoslavia. The US needs to resolve the arrears problem if any progress is to be made on improving the US-UN relationship. The conference participants had a brief, sharp debate as to whether the US Congress had the legal authority to abrogate its commitments originally made under the UN Participation Act. Specifically, could the US unilaterally insist on lowering its obligations from 31 percent of peacekeeping costs to 25 percent and from 25 percent of the general budget to 20 percent? This is one of the conditions of the Helms-Biden package designed to pay US arrears in turn for the UN meeting specific US demands on reform. Should the US remain in arrears to the UN through the end of 1999, it is quite likely that the General Assembly would deny the US voting rights in the body. While some in the group agreed that such a sanction would be an appropriate response to US behavior, others feared that might cause an anti-UN backlash in the US, thus further damaging US-UN relations. As one participant noted, "whether UN advocates like it or not, the UN needs the US more than the US needs the UN." It was this reality that left the group so unsettled about the future of the UN. Indeed, there were many who argued that once the arrears issue was settled that it would be important to reduce UN dependence on the United States, at least in the financial area, by reforming the assessment process to spread the burden more evenly. One participant even argued that all veto-wielding members of the Security Council should pay the same amount. In the end, there was a consensus that no matter how much money the US paid, it would still wield disproportionate influence over the organization. Without US support, there would be very little in the way of UN leadership The United Nations' Role Conference participants explored the role of the United Nations in the current world of global governance. An underlying theme was that the UN must better fit the international community in which it exists. Reform for the sake of reform will not suffice. Unless the world community is clear about what it wants the UN to do, the UN will be able to do very little. And, unless the US can resolve its own internal ambivalence about its relationship to the UN, the world body will be able to do even less. Adequate funding is also a key. Some recommendations from the Conference participants: • A move to focus UN efforts on four core political functions: international peace and security, democratization, human rights, and humanitarian assistance • A realignment of the Security Council membership to reflect current geopolitical realities • An effort to balance the one-nation, one-vote system with a decision-making procedure that reflects the relationship between power, influence, and responsibility • A greater role for the mid-size powers and the European Union • A discussion on limiting the veto to Article VII (peace enforcement) matters; even if this is eventually rejected, it will bring attention to the problem of the veto • Some sort of UN crisis response force, whether drawn from national militaries or constituted as a standing UN force • A revision of the UN's system of finance with the aim of avoiding over dependence on any one country--one possibility would be equal contributions by all veto-wielding members • A redefinition of the UN's relationship with the United States in a way that allows US power to be harnessed to the global agenda without unnecessarily undermining US freedom of action. The report concludes that in the next century the UN will continue
to play some role as the superego of the world's nation-states, as a
global conscience, while also serving as a forum for the coordination
of action, however difficult implementation may be. But the UN must
also find a new leadership role among the multiplying number of other
international actors (including other IGOs) among those in the business
world, and among the ever more powerful voices of international civil
society. (1) a more formal linkage of business and civil society into the myriad
deliberative bodies that make up the UN system and |
|
|
|