NEW YORK, Sept 25 (IPS) – The Summit of the Future may be over, but the real and present world is still on fire.
As the General Assembly, an annual ritual that brings together dozens of heads of state in New York, gets underway, key questions remain unanswered about the role and future of the United Nations, a body created nearly 80 years ago to maintain international peace and security.
Israel’s devastating war in Gaza has spread to Lebanon, 25 million people in conflict-torn Sudan are at risk of starvation, and the deadly war in Ukraine rages on with the UN failing to prevent or play a significant mediating role.
The Pact for the future – the summit’s final document, agreed upon by states after long and often bitter negotiations – covers everything from culture and sport to climate change, the Sustainable Development Goals, human rights, gender equality, ending poverty, social cohesion, peace and security, Security Council reform, disarmament, science and technology, youth, financial institution reform, data governance, artificial intelligence and, believe it or not, even space.
It is striking that much of the text consists of repeated and recycled formulations from previously agreed UN documents and that the language is largely vague and ambitious.
There are few concrete, actionable conclusions that could advance the Summit’s lofty goals. Instead, there are more calls for reports by the Secretary-General and more global meetings.
In the area of peace and security, for example, the outcome document does not address the reasons for the accelerated decline in UN mediation and the crisis in UN peacekeeping missions in recent years. In one country after another, parties to the conflict are bypassing or rejecting the good offices of the Secretary-General and calling for the withdrawal of peacekeeping missions.
Instead, it calls for “an evaluation” of peacekeeping operations and for more global meetings “to discuss issues relating to peacekeeping operations, peacebuilding and conflict.” In classic UN tradition, when there are no answers or a path forward, the UN calls for more reports and more meetings.
At a time when mass atrocities and the international collapse of the rule of law are becoming the new norm, as we are seeing in Gaza, the only “new” language in the document is a request to the Secretary-General to “assess the need” for more resources for the Human Rights Office.
Grandiose initiatives like the Summit of the Future are not new. Previous UN Secretaries-General have called for global summits that have not achieved much.
The late Boutros Boutros-Ghali deserves credit for pushing through UN reforms with less fanfare. His Agenda for peacepaved the way for expanded UN peacekeeping operations, more UN-led mediation and discreet conflict prevention efforts around the world, while cutting bloated bureaucracy in the UN Secretariat by eliminating more than a thousand posts.
Under the leadership of the late Kofi Annan, In greater freedom is credited with developing the concept of the Sustainable Development Goals, establishing a new peacebuilding architecture, and a new Human Rights Council as an alternative to the discredited Commission on Human Rights.
Although these initiatives generate both new and concrete ideas, their impact is limited.
Former SG Ban Ki-moon, in his modest way, did not call for special summits, but instead made effective use of existing global forums to advocate the call for action on climate change.
Unlike previous initiatives, SG Antonio Guterres’ input lacked focus, concrete and achievable proposals and courage for the Summit of the Future. This led many UN observers to view the event as a public relations exercise designed to prop up the UN’s flagging image and distract from the organization’s real shortcomings.
The Summit was a missed opportunity to address some of the fundamental issues plaguing the UN. These issues include: the gridlock in the Security Council and the lip service paid by the Permanent Five to SC reform; compliance with international law, impunity and the prevention of mass atrocities; the disappointing performance and flaws in the structure of the Human Rights Council; the questionable performance of the Peacebuilding Commission; the need to reinvent the UN’s role in peace and security; the reform of a bloated UN bureaucracy built on patronage with key secretariat departments controlled by three P5 states; the need to review the role, appointment and means of ensuring the independence of the Secretary-General; and how to “reinvigorate” the General Assembly and open it up to non-state actors – among other issues.
Despite all its shortcomings, the UN is needed now more than ever, especially because of the emergence of new threats and challenges to international peace and security and the looming threat of climate change.
Thousands of UN workers deployed in many places around the world deserve our respect and recognition. But they also deserve greater leadership and vision.
In this month’s edition of Diplomacy Now, five authors, who are analysts and insiders familiar with the UN system, offer their views on the role and election of the Secretary-General, the need for and progress in Security Council reform, and the objectives of the Summit for the Future.
As with any edition, the views expressed by these authors are not necessarily all our own. However, ICDI remains committed to the ethos and philosophy that open debate, dialogue, diplomacy and mediation, rather than armed conflict and war, offer the way forward to resolving any conflict.
Jamal Benomar is a former UN diplomat. He worked for 25 years at the UN, including as a special envoy for Yemen and special advisor to former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
Source: Diplomacy Now
IPS UN Office
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All rights reservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service