Around The World In 180 Days: Can The UN Reform In Six Months? 
By Aaron Goldstein (03/28/05) mailto:jillian_writes@yahoo.com

Kofi Annan must have been relieved that the United States and most of the world has been focussed on the fate of Terri Schiavo. Over the past year, Annan and the UN have received a great deal of unwanted attention primarily due to the Oil for Food Scandal. The UN has also been viewed derisively because rogue states such as Cuba, Sudan and Zimbabwe have been included in its Commission on Human Rights. 

More recently, the UN has been under scrutiny because of the actions of its peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of Congo for raping underage girls. The resignation of the UN High Commissioner on Refugees, Ruud Lubbers, because of allegations of sexual harassment have not helped matters much either.

So it was that Kofi Annan spoke in front of the UN General Assembly on March 21st. Ostensibly, it was to give a five year progress report on the implementation of the Millennium Declaration. But undoubtedly the aforementioned events were a factor in some of Annan’s remarks. The Secretary General asked member states to adopt a series of proposals called “In Larger Freedom” when their leaders meet at the UN this September. 

Amongst other items, Annan calls upon member states to complete the Doha round of GATT negotiations no later than 2006; to spend 0.7% of their GDP on official development assistance by 2015; to develop a broader framework to stabilize greenhouse gases after 2012 (read the Kyoto Protocol, Part II) and to establish a Peacebuilding Commission.

But probably the two most noteworthy proposals were the establishment of a Democracy Fund and the replacement of the Commission on Human Rights with a Human Rights Council. It is on these two proposals that I will comment.

There is no doubt that the proposed Democracy Fund is inspired by the fledgling democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq and expressions in support of democracy in Lebanon, Egypt, Iran and the Ukraine. There is also no doubt that the United States has been the driving force behind democratization. So the UN wants in on the action. According to Annan, the Democracy Fund “would provide funding and technical assistance to countries seeking to establish or strengthen their democracy.” 

Of course, this from the organization that brought you the Oil for Food Program. The UN is not exactly known for its accountability. What would be the criteria by which member states could receive monies from the Democracy Fund? Who would set the criteria and award the monies? What is to prevent a scenario where Syria and Venezuela state that Lebanon and Bolivia cannot have monies from the Democracy Fund? What is to prevent Syria and Venezuela from taking these monies for themselves and using those funds to build jails to house their dissidents? The Democracy Fund sounds like a white elephant in the making. And who will have to clean up after the white elephant’s mess?

Then there is the proposed Human Rights Council. So what is the difference between a Commission on Human Rights and a Human Rights Council? According to Annan, the Human Rights Council would be a smaller body. Currently, there are 53 member states that sit on the Commission. Annan adds that it would be elected directly by a two-thirds majority of the UN General Assembly. Well, that pretty much comprises much of the Non-Aligned Movement. It also guarantees that the United States (and for that matter countries such as Great Britain, Australia and perhaps even the Czech Republic) would never sit on the Human Rights Council. And, of course, forget about Israel. Not that it got much of a fair shake in the current system. Israel last sat on the Commission of Human Rights in 1970.

Annan states that the Commission’s “capacity to perform its tasks has been undermined by its declining credibility and professionalism.” But if the General Assembly must elect the Human Rights Council members what is there to prevent Cuba, Sudan or Zimbabwe from holding a seat on the Human Rights Council? Indeed, for many member states the UN General Assembly is a forum to practice democracy where democracy is not practiced at home. 

To be certain, the presence of John Bolton as the United States’ new representative to the UN will keep Annan on his toes. But one man alone cannot undo decades of corruption and cow towing to despots. 

What would convince me that the UN has genuinely reformed would be if its treatment of Israel changed 180 degrees. Imagine a UN where Israel is not repeatedly vilified in resolution after resolution by the General Assembly. Imagine a UN that devotes its Emergency Sessions to – actual emergencies. Namely Rwanda and Sudan. Imagine a UN where Israel can fully participate on the UN’s agencies, boards and commissions including the Security Council. Imagine a UN where there is only one agency that addresses the concerns of refugees. Yes, abolish the UN Relief Works Agency that has become a nest for Palestinian terrorists. Why must there be different standards for Palestinian refugees and refugees from the rest of the world? Imagine a UN with Shimon Peres as its Secretary General.

Unfortunately, the problem here is that all one can do is imagine.

The proposed Democracy Fund, the Human Rights Council and other parts of In Larger Freedom are little more than window dressing. It gives the appearance that the UN is doing something when in fact it is doing exactly what it has been doing all along – very little. The UN was best summed up in the book Real Men Don’t Eat Quiche. Written by Bruce Feirstein in 1982, he wrote, “In 35 years, all the UN has managed to do is to produce a marginally attractive Christmas card.” Nearly a quarter century later this still rings true. These reforms mean precious little if the UN cannot protect Bosnian Muslims in UN safe havens; cannot protect young Congolese girls who do not have enough to eat; cannot protect Tutsis from Hutus and cannot protect Sudanese Christians from its Muslim government.

You can travel around the world in 180 days. The UN will stay right where it is.