reframe

Untied Nations

// October 24th, 2005 // World Issues

“Last month, world leaders met in New York to try and forge a common response to these challenges… They decided to create new UN bodies for promoting human rights and building lasting peace in war-torn countries. They promised to fight terrorism in all its forms, and to take collective action, when needed, to save populations from genocide and other heinous crimes. They decided on important reforms of the UN Secretariat.

But on climate change and Security Council reform they could make only weak statements. And on nuclear proliferation and disarmament they could not agree at all. They have left us a great deal of work to do.
Today, as we mark the 60th anniversary of our indispensable institution, I promise you that I will do my part. And I trust that you, as global citizens, will do yours.”

Excerpt of Kofi Annan’s message for the 60th Anniversary of the UN.

60 years on, it seems that the UN finds itself in a bind but then if one looks into the history of the UN it has always been in a bind- or more accurately, in two shackles. First, the lack of political will from empowered countries to give up aspects of their authority, and even more inexcusably failing to honor their own commitments in the UN. Second, the ridiculous HR structures of the UN- combining the worst aspects of bureaucracy from its member nations- leading to massive waste, and has been highlighted in the Oil-for-Food scandal, corruption. I have had experience with both Country Representatives in the General Assembly and Senior Secretariat officials from New York and can recount stories from both sides of one blaming the entire problem on the other.

For the majority of it’s history the UN has been bound in the Cold War deadlock- where people working for the UN were literally trying to stop things happening. Possibly the worst organisational culture that could have developed. Since then we have had two legitimate opportunities for real reform. The end of the Cold-War gave the last remaining superpower the opportunity to dictate a new era- and despite failure in Rwanda, things were comparatively ok in the UN in the 90′s- nonetheless real system change was not realized. The second occurred on September 11th 2001, when history unfolded and the eyes of the world waited for the US to respond. They could have done anything and everyone would have agreed- they had the “moral authority” that’s now being bantered about. It could have been the birth of a new international order, a global system upon which the 21st century would be built. But the opportunity was lost- a short-sighted empire that assumed it would remain in power forever, ignoring the lesson of the history of civilizations.

Will there be a third such tipping point? I believe there will be. And I believe that the next time we will actually get it right. Because the next time success will be the only option for us. When confronted by the environmental and resource challenges of the next two decades, when our Earth itself confront human progress and the geopolitics that come with it- we will again feel the urgency and clarity that inspired the UNs founding exactly sixty years ago- that it is a most necessary step for the survival of humanity.