The U.N. and Its 'Credibility' in the Middle East
BY BENNY AVNI
February 28, 2005

Secretary-General Annan recently wrote a fine piece in the Wall Street Journal where, as part of his organization's defense, he took credit for helping organize elections in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Palestinian Arab territories.
In all three cases, the U.N. indeed sent teams of electoral experts; in Afghanistan's vote it actually took the lead. So why did it sound like a lot of chutzpah for Mr. Annan, who once famously said he could do business with Saddam, to claim leadership in the current campaign for freedom in the Arab and Islamic world?
Precisely because the United Nations did not agree on some earlier actions in Iraq, Mr. Annan wrote, today it has much needed credibility with, and access to, Iraqi groups who must agree to join in the new political process if peace is to prevail.
By its nature as an organization incorporating regimes that don't have to pass an entry test, the U.N. tends to appease and comfort forces such as those that opposed elections in Iraq. As a representative of all 191 member states, the secretary-general cannot use his bully pulpit to admonish the kind of bad behavior that some of his constituents consider good governance.
Last week, when Egypt arrested a prominent dissident, Secretary of State Rice summarily canceled a Cairo visit. President Mubarak immediately announced he would allow a multiparty parliamentary election. Can you imagine Mr. Annan calling off any of those endless international get-togethers he attends because of an anti-democratic measure by a host?
As the weekend bloodshed in Tel Aviv demonstrates, the American-led drive for democratization is fraught with dangers and far from victorious at this point. Just like in Iraq, powerful neighbors fearing change within their own borders have allied themselves with local players who want to turn the clock to the corrupt and bankrupt ways of old.
It was bad enough for President Assad of Syria that a brotherly Baathist regime was toppled across his eastern border. In the last few months a May election date was looming large in his backyard of Lebanon. The Druze leader Walid Jumbalat - whose survival instincts through the years have made him the perfect harbinger of things to come in Lebanon - grew increasingly brave in his anti-Syrian rhetoric. Even worse, he was joined by Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister and a Sunni powerhouse backed by the French and the Saudis.
A U.N. forensic team is now trying to solve the whodunit of Hariri's assassination. But even if in typical fashion Mr. Annan will end up reporting no conclusive evidence of the obvious, most in Lebanon and the rest of the region assume the Syrians - perhaps in cahoots with Hezbollah, whose Iranian patron is increasingly at odds with the Saudis - were responsible.
Mr. Assad's henchmen are unable to contemplate the loss of Lebanon, which serves them both as a cash cow and a steam valve. Now they are also the chief suspects in attempting to change the subject by turning the focus southward, letting loose their client terror organization, Islamic Jihad, in the streets of Tel Aviv.
The Palestinian Arab premier, Mahmoud Abbas, is about to learn that reasoning with them is pointless. Any houdna or other form of temporary ceasefire with terrorists and their state backers will end up damaging the small, hesitant, but clear paces his people have begun taking on the path to democracy.
Meanwhile, the U.N. continues to seek to coax the region's anti-democratic players, in the hope of bringing back a comprehensive peace process- those two magic words that Mr. Assad hopes will save him from giving up Lebanon.
Mr. Annan's representative at Hariri's funeral, Lakhdar Brahimi, rushed to consult with Syria's allies in Beirut. Another envoy, Terje Roed-Larsen, a frequent visitor to Damascus, regularly reports Mr. Assad is eager to negotiate with Israel. But as the endless negotiations with the late Arafat proved, any peace process backed by violence is a dead end. Like Arafat, the Syrian Baathists use violence - in Israel, Iraq, and Lebanon - to hang on to power.
It may well be that the U.N.'s credibility with, and access to bad guys across the region could be somehow marginally employed in the increasingly vigorous drive toward Middle Eastern democracy. At best, however, it is but a temporary tool toward eradicating the heirs to Saddam and Arafat so true peace, not an endless process, can prevail.
Mr. Avni covers the United Nations for The New York Sun.