D K Pandita
“The United Nations was not created to take humanity to heaven, but to save it from hell.” – Dag Hammarskjold, the UN’s second Secretary-General.
In the aftermath of the two World Wars many nations were convinced that to deal with global conflict, it was necessary to encourage the world to invest in an international organization. Many believed that such an organization would help the world to avoid war. After the first World War (1914-1918) the League of Nations was born. However, despite its initial success, it could not prevent the Second World War (1939-45). Many more people died and were wounded in this war than ever before.
Currently, the UN had 193 member states from all continents. These include almost all independent states. In the UN General Assembly, all members have one vote each. In the UN Security Council, there are five permanent members representing the Northern hemisphere of the world. These are: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and China. These states were selected as permanent members as they were the most powerful immediately after the Second World War and because they constituted the victors in the War. The UN’s most visible public figure, and the representative head, is the Secretary-General. The present Secretary-General is António Guterres.
The recent Israel-Hamas conflict has again questioned the significance and objective of UN keeping its word on global de-escalations if not altogether avoiding global conflicts. It was in 1947, the United Nations adopted Resolution 181, known as the ‘Partition Plan’, which sought to divide the British Mandate of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. On May 14, 1948, the State of Israel was created, sparking the first Arab-Israeli War. The war ended in 1949 with Israel’s victory, but 750,000 Palestinians were displaced, and the territory was divided into 3 parts: the State of Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Several wars, generally won by Israel followed.
In its October 7 offensive, Hamas militants killed more than 1,400 people, including civilians and soldiers, according to Israeli authorities, and abducted around 200 more. It was the most deadly attack by militants in Israel’s 75-year history and has been described as the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. To stop the worsening of global order on 18th October, the UN chief urged immediate action to prevent Israel-Gaza conflict spillover. UN Secretary-General António Guterres voiced grave concern over the escalating conflict in Israel and Gaza and stressed the need to prevent the violence from spreading into the wider region. The lack of concrete action undermines the Security Council’s role in maintaining international peace and security and protecting unarmed civilians.
Developing nations, led by India, will balance their diplomacy by supporting the Palestinian cause while highlighting the need for a Jewish state in the same breath. Islamic nations outside the Middle East will profess support for Palestine as part of their Muslim brotherhood. In short, all these nations will be part of the wait and watch club since they have little or no role to play in resolving the conflict. If Palestine’s fate continues to be in the hands of militant outfits like Hamas and if Israel continues to be governed by hawkish political leaders, peace will continue to elude this region.
Given the UN’s inability to even remotely influence or mandate peace to resolve the global conflicts, it is the right time to reform UN and its other agencies. To examine the debate over reform of the UN Security Council, in 1992, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution. The resolution reflected three main complaints: The Security Council no longer represents contemporary political realities. Its decisions reflect only Western values and interests and are dominated by a few powers. It lacks equitable representation.
In recent years, there have been demands for reform of the world body. However, there is little clarity and consensus on the nature of reform. Two basic kinds of reforms face the UN, reform of the organization’s structures and processes; and a review of the issues that fall within the jurisdiction of the organization. Almost everyone is agreed that both aspects of reform are necessary. What they cannot agree on is precisely what is to be done, how it is to be done, and when it is to be done.
On the reform of structures and processes, the biggest discussion has been on the functioning of the Security Council. Related to this has been the demand for an increase in the UN Security Council’s permanent and non-permanent membership so that the realities of contemporary world politics are better reflected in the structure of the organization. In particular, there are proposals to increase membership from Asia, Africa and South America. Beyond this, the US and other Western countries want improvements in the UN’s budgetary procedures and its administration
On the issues to be given greater priority or to be brought within the jurisdiction of the UN, some countries and experts want the organization to play a greater or more effective role in peace and security missions, while others want its role to be confined to development and humanitarian work (health, education, environment, population control, human rights, gender and social justice).
Follow our WhatsApp channel
