Reforming the United Nations for Peace and Security

More documents

Recommendations

Info

instruments so that they can be better equipped to address suchchallenges. 108The latest round of reactive UN navel-gazing was commissioned by UNSecretary-General Kofi Annan in response to what he saw as a “decisivemoment” to assess current threats to international peace and security. Thetask of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change (whosemembers had an average age of 70) was to evaluate the extent to whichexisting policies and institutions are addressing those threats, and “torecommend ways of strengthening the United Nations to providecollective security for the twenty-first century” (High-level Panel report, p.vii).The Secretary-General’s agenda was not at all veiled. Against thebackground of criticism from US President George Bush that the UN was indanger of becoming irrelevant, and naturally worried about the deepeningdivisions within the UN system over the US “pre-emptive” intervention inIraq, his concern was to ensure that the UN remain, according to theMillennium Declaration, “the indispensable common house of the entirehuman family.” He was clearly disturbed by the growing perceptionaround the world that the UN was losing relevance as the US, the majoractor within the organization, exhibited behavior that undermined theworld body. Such behavior has included US unilateral acts of nosethumbingwith respect to multilateral agreements and treaties, notablythe Kyoto Protocol, the landmines treaty, the Convention on the Rights ofthe Child, treaties to stop the recruitment of child soldiers, the Conventionon Discrimination against Women, the Covenant on Economic and SocialRights, the Biological Weapons Convention, the Nuclear Non-proliferationTreaty, the Convention on Small Arms, the comprehensive test ban treaty,the Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty, and the Rome Statute creating theInternational Criminal Court.108 Richard Falk, “Liberalism at the Global Level: The Last of the Independent Commissions?”Millennium: Journal of International Studies, vol. 24 (1995), p. 565.114
The US commitment to the global rule of law has been a matter of debatefor quite some time. 109 As John Murphy points out, this commitment hasbeen widely questioned particularly within the past two decades or sobecause of this behavior. While not necessarily an “international outlaw”,the US has certainly given the impression recently that it is lukewarm in itssupport of any global rule of law. 110 Its cavalier attitude is evident in itscounter-terrorism strategy and in its treatment of al Qaeda and Talibanprisoners at Guantanamo Bay. By labeling these prisoners “enemycombatants”, the US government seeks to ignore established norms of theGeneva Conventions. Many of the detainees, according to AmnestyInternational, are denied their rights under international law and held inconditions that amount to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Theyface severe psychological distress and many have attempted suicide. Untilrecently people worldwide admired the United States for the moralexample it set. That allure risks being tarnished if the US government isunderstood to believe that international human rights standards are onlyfor others, not for US citizens. 111Kofi Annan is well aware of what the resulting corrosion of the global ruleof law will mean for the future of the United Nations. Unless the UN findsa way of cajoling the US to adhere to international legal principles, this willbe another nail in the UN’s coffin.CONCEPTUAL CONFUSION ON THE ISSUE OF COLLECTIVE SECURITYReading the High-level Panel report, one sees almost immediately itsunderlying agenda: to make the case for an expanded and updated notion109 The US attitude towards a global rule of law has mirrored its attitude towards multilateralinstitutions generally. On the latter, see Rosemary Foot, S. Neil MacFarlane, and MichaelMastanduno, eds., US Hegemony and International Organizations (Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 2003).110 John F. Murphy, The United States and the Rule of Law in International Affairs (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2004).111See Kenneth Roth, “The Charade of US Ratification of International Human RightsTreaties,” Chicago Journal of International Law, Fall 2000, athttp://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/un/2003/0806charade.htm, accessed on January 3,2005.115
Page 1:
Reformingthe United Nationsfor Peac
Page 5 and 6:
ContentsWorkshop ParticipantsvAckno
Page 7 and 8:
ParticipantsWorkshop on United Nati
Page 9:
Michael ReismanMyres S. McDougal Pr
Page 13 and 14:
OverviewErnesto ZedilloDirector, Ya
Page 15 and 16:
The important decision to make Secu
Page 17 and 18:
member of the Panel’s Secretariat
Page 19 and 20:
the new permanent members with a cl
Page 21 and 22:
A model for a Security Council with
Page 23 and 24:
criteria are intended not just to l
Page 25 and 26:
TERRORISMThe Panel report urges the
Page 27 and 28:
Participants also questioned the va
Page 29 and 30:
FINAL CONSIDERATIONSThe High-level
Page 31 and 32:
Promoting Democracy through Interna
Page 33 and 34:
law—can channel internal dissent
Page 35 and 36:
Many others had differences with th
Page 37 and 38:
THE BEST KEPT SECRET: THE COMMUNITY
Page 39 and 40:
Unfortunately, the Seoul Conference
Page 41 and 42:
The important point is that the abi
Page 43 and 44:
government by the Group’s most po
Page 45 and 46:
Ministerial Meeting, the Convening
Page 47 and 48:
2. Private foundations whose missio
Page 49 and 50:
APPENDIX TO “PROMOTING DEMOCRACY
Page 51 and 52:
The Report of the High-level Panel
Page 53 and 54:
threats”. 28 So vulnerable indeed
Page 55 and 56:
that the UN might be “facing a fo
Page 57 and 58:
aw distributions of power and make
Page 59 and 60:
Security Council. One of the Commis
Page 61 and 62:
The second message of the report st
Page 63 and 64:
vote of this member with veto power
Page 65 and 66:
GOVERNANCE IN THE ECONOMIC DOMAINWh
Page 67 and 68:
Comments on the Report of the High-
Page 69 and 70:
ecommendations would also have the
Page 71 and 72:
PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS ON ECONOMIC A
Page 73 and 74:
What is worse is that almost an exc
Page 75 and 76: The conceptual underpinning of the
Page 77 and 78: such an eventuality; and to assist
Page 79 and 80: But it compromises on its own presc
Page 81 and 82: The UN represents the highest level
Page 83 and 84: The European Union in the United Na
Page 85 and 86: In the UN, the European Common Fore
Page 87 and 88: egard to resolutions put to a vote
Page 89 and 90: The European Commission cautiously
Page 91 and 92: The Group of Eastern European State
Page 93 and 94: “respect … for international la
Page 95 and 96: political declarations, especially
Page 97 and 98: marginalization. If the Security Co
Page 99 and 100: growth, the success of the democrat
Page 101 and 102: Comments on the Report of the High-
Page 103 and 104: • Regarding ECOSOC, the report ob
Page 105 and 106: cause of international peace and se
Page 107 and 108: • The Panel flatly rejects the ar
Page 109 and 110: In Model A, six of the nine new sea
Page 111 and 112: The Model A version of the new SC w
Page 113 and 114: Increased legitimacy helps Council
Page 115 and 116: essence, the Panel is recommending
Page 117 and 118: put under one purview. There are si
Page 119 and 120: eviews of behavior in some area, be
Page 121 and 122: A More Secure World? A Critique of
Page 123 and 124: Recognizing the crisis of confidenc
Page 125: creation of an international commis
Page 129 and 130: The closest the UN came to executin
Page 131 and 132: them, as the Panel readily acknowle
Page 133 and 134: Though the Panel offers very little
Page 135 and 136: the concept of collective security
Page 137 and 138: Assembly. Hopefully that input will
Page 139 and 140: generally also asserted that, despi
Page 141 and 142: shortcomings, as putting ever more
Page 143 and 144: powerful pairing of arguments that
Page 145 and 146: elsewhere and/or earlier. As discus
Page 147 and 148: for radical reform from the Secreta
Page 149 and 150: At San Francisco, the major powers
Page 151 and 152: over process. The prevailing view,
Page 153 and 154: significant power in its region. Th
Page 155 and 156: consequential proposals in other ar
Page 157 and 158: Indeed, if the Council is expanded
Page 159 and 160: egard—whether measured individual
Page 161 and 162: arriers to external intervention in
Page 163 and 164: Council, permanent or elected, have
Page 165 and 166: Security Council Expansion: Can’t
Page 167 and 168: importantly the quite proper concer
Page 169 and 170: superpowers in those situations whe
Page 171 and 172: Democratic majority (itself virtual
Page 173 and 174: developed countries known as the G-
Page 175 and 176: widely, an effective body might rea
Page 177 and 178:
any US action. In much of the world
Page 179 and 180:
Some Thoughts—Mostly Cautionary
Page 181 and 182:
Panel Report goes further, however,
Page 183 and 184:
• If the state fails in the midst
Page 185 and 186:
the proactive rescue measures to th
Page 187 and 188:
• There is a need for early and c
Page 189 and 190:
HIV/AIDS could focus sustained glob
Page 191 and 192:
THE SECURITY COUNCILEnlargement of
Page 193 and 194:
model will depend, as at present, p
Page 195 and 196:
Brief Notes on the Report of the Hi
Page 197 and 198:
speech at Oxford in 1993. Ten years
Page 199 and 200:
Negotiation difficulties, however,
Page 201 and 202:
consensus but they embody little in
Page 203 and 204:
NEGOTIATING CHARTER REFORMFor the a
Page 205 and 206:
asic willingness to commit to a sys
Page 207 and 208:
ecent Chapter VII resolutions have
Page 210:
The Yale Center for the Study of Gl
show all

Reforming the United Nations for Peace and Security

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?