United Nations - by Gilbert Achcar
The United Nations (UN) is founded on the "idealistic' principle of the equality of states. In other words, one state, one vote, whatever the population, wealth or power that state has in the world. This beautiful principle is the basic reason why the UN Assembly only has the power to make recommendations. The real decision-making power is held by the Security Council, the only body which can authorise the use of force by the UN (Charter of San Francisco, Article 7). The five post-war 'great powers' (USA, Russia, China, France, Britain) are the only permanent members of the Security Council, and each of them has a veto over any of its resolutions.
The United States was the main sponsor behind the creation of the UN back in 1945. The role of the New York based The major powers plan to transform the United Nations to reflect the growing concentration of political, economic and military power in the world says Luis Suarez. To do this they want to • widen the functions of the Security Council to include new problems like the drug trade and the environment • restructure the military command of the United Nations, and build up some kind of rapid intervention force • diminish the role of the General Assembly, particularly in terms of the level of sanction that can be voted by the assembly. • introduce some kind of veto mechanism in the General Assembly • reinforce the legal powers of the Secretary General All these measures would mean a militarization of the way the United Nations works, and an increase in the powers of the Security Council, which is dominated by the major powers. Some of the propositions might seem well-intentioned -- such as the new priority given to the struggle against drug smuggling or the protection of the environment. But we know that these environment. But we know that inese 24 International Viewpoint #267 June 1995 organisation, alongside the World Bank and International Monetary Fund in Washington, was to be the consolidation of the post-war status quo in an Americandominated world. The only limitation was the blocking power of the USSR on the Security Council - Moscow being the only member of the "big five' likely to represent an opposition to US plans (until 1971 China's seat was held by the 'Nationalist' government of Formosa, now called Taiwan). Only 10 of the 51 members of the US dominated General Assembly in 1946 were African or Asian states.
The first major military intervention under the blue flag was the American intervention in Korea in 1950. UN support was voted after the USSR began to boycott the Security Council in protest at the occupation of China's seat by Formosa rather than the new People's Republic of positive principles can be transformed into instruments of domination by the great powers. Cuba would like to see the United Nations become more democratic. This would mean, for instance, increasing the number of seats on the Security Council, electing its members from the General Assembly and removing the veto mechanism. Clear limits must be put on the powers of the Security Council. The General Assembly must have a reinforced role too. Finally, NonGovernmental Organisations and other representatives of civil society should be involved more in the General Assembly. There should be other kinds of intervention, not just those of overnment The author directs the Center for American Studies in Havana, Cuba. This article is excerpted from the transcription of his intervention at the "Other Voices of the Planet" Summit organised by the Committee for Cancellation of Third World Debt (COCAD) on 18 March 1995. *
China under Mao
Zedung. The USSR hurriedly ended its boycott, but the USA engineered a vote
... LA authorising the Assembly to take charge of dossiers
DAN blocked at the Security
Council level. During the
1950's, the US played the
Assembly
General against the Security
Council (or more exactly, against the Soviet veto).
Examples include UN
Assembly support for the
US Marines' intervention in Lebanon in 1958 and the intervention in the
Congo in 1960.
After 1960, the situation changed. Depos?
colonialisation in Africa and Asia brought a large number of new states into the UN. This gradually shifted the consensus in shitted the consensus in the General Assembly towards the positions of the 'non-aligned' states' movement [led by the modernising
Arab
PLANTE
Nationalist Nasser of
Egypt, the secular Indian leader Nehru, and the independent
'Communist Tito of
Yugoslavia].
The number of non-
(Speaker) ".... Nea permanent members of what I was gomg the Security Council was increased from six to its present level of ten. Only permanent members have an absolute veto, though.
This transformation of the international organisation forced the United States to change their strategy in the UN. The US used its veto for the first time in 1970, opposing the imposition of sanctions on the white regimes of Rhodesia (now
Zimbabwe) and South Africa. The gulf between the US and the UN grew throughout the 1970s. During this period the UN gave the Palestine Liberation
Organisation observer status (1974),
Reform the United Nations ? To do what ?
Reform the United Nations ? To do what ?
• United States?
LA PAiX
ANS UN MONDE MEILLEUR...
hegemony. The Soviet and (after 1971) Chinese vetoes confirmed the American weakness in the Security Council, and the only military actions approved were modest "peace-keeping" actions like those in Cyprus, South Lebanon and on the disputed Indo-Pakistan frontier.
In 1990, the situation was transformed
)-
5
Peace! In a better world!" (in the ing to say" (General) "Me too!"
recognised that Zionism was a form of racism (1975), and called for a "New
International Economic Order" (1977).
More generally, this was a period of declining American influence in the world
- especially after their defeat in the
Vietnam war.
The 'divorce' was most marked under
US President Ronald Reagan. He began a deliberate 'counter-attack' on the UN - withholding the US financial contribution to the organisation, and reducing the budget unilaterally. He also challenged the
### ZUT! C'EST
EXACTEMENT MON DiSCOURS! Moi AUSSi! hall) "Damn! exactly 'one state — one vote' principle by proposing that states' votes on the UN budget be counted in relation to those states' contributions to that budget.
During this period the UN condemned the US naval blockade of Nicaragua (1984), bombing of Libya (1986) and intervention in Panama (1989). There were also a number of condemnations of America's client state Israel, and of the US blockade of Cuba.
Between 1970 and 1990, the General Assembly majority frequently opposed US again, this time by the paralysis and collapse of the USSR. Within a few hours of the Iragi invasion of Kuwait, a SovietUS communiqué had been issued. This set the tone for the Soviet green light for US intervention, including the August 1990 blockade of Iraq, and culminating in the Security Council approval for the US-led military action against Iraq.
The UN seemed once again to be a useful instrument for the US government. Domestic opposition to military interventions abroad (the 'Vietnam syndrome') has been overcome by the use of UN cover. George Bush even used the UN support for the Gulf War to ask for international contributions towards the costs of the invasion - he collected a record $53 US billion.
In Somalia (1992) and Haiti (1994) the United States has again used UN cover to allow the deployment of troops abroad.
The new US Congress — dominated by the right-wing Republicans— wants the UN to be completely subject to US wishes, and is not even satisfied with Clinton's "UN a la carte" approach. *
The author lectures on international relations at the Université de Paris VIII. This article is a summarised transcription of his intervention at the "Other Voices of the Planet" Summit organised by the Committee for Cancellation of Third World Debt (COCAD) on 18 March 1995.
This and other contributions are available (price SUS 10 or equivalent) in English, French or Dutch from COCAD, 29 Plantinstraat, 1070 Brussels, Belgium
25
International Viewpoint #267 June 1995
Mexico