UN, United Nations
UN embarrassingly toothless when needed most
Wolfgang Hansson
This is a commenting text. Analysis and positions are the writer's.
Published 08.09
Quick version
- World leaders gathered at the United Nations in New York to talk about peace and equality, while wars continue in, among other things. Lebanon and Ukraine without concrete measures from the UN.
- The United States and France proposed a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah, but concrete details were lacking and the major powers' veto paralyzes the decision-making process in the UN Security Council.
- The UN's inability to act is due to the vested interests of the great powers; even humanitarian crises such as the famine in Sudan remain unresolved. Sweden's foreign minister criticized the UN's failure during his speech.
During the week, the world's leaders stood in a grand hall at the UN headquarters in New York and spoke passionately about the importance of peace and equality.
This at the same time as a number of wars rage on without them being able to do anything.
Rarely has the world's flagship for peace been so embarrassingly crippled and toothless. In a situation when the organization is most needed.
The annual UN summit had just begun when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered an unprecedented bombing offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon. In one day, over 500 people lost their lives. Many of them women and children.
At the same time, Russia continues with its terrorist bombings against schools, residential buildings and other civilian targets in Ukraine.
A humanitarian disaster is ongoing 24/7 in Gaza.
You would think that when almost all the world's leaders are under the same roof, they should put their wise heads together to stop the wars.
One by one, they have stepped up to the podium in New York and delivered beautiful speeches about peace and freedom. But in practice they have not achieved a depth. As usual, there is a lot of talk but little workshop.
The US and France took the initiative to call on Israel and Hezbollah to agree to a 21-day ceasefire. Many countries supported the proposal.
But the plan contains practically nothing. There are no concrete proposals on how a ceasefire would be achieved on the ground. Everything must be negotiated between two parties embroiled in a rapidly flaring war that is the result of decades of enmity.
The Security Council is the only body in the UN that can make what are, at least on paper, binding decisions. But it is crippled by the great power struggle and enmity between the US, Russia and China, all of which can veto decisions that are made.
The US says no to anything that is detrimental to Israel and Ukraine. Russia says no to anything that disadvantages Iran (=Hezbollah) or themselves.
Vetoing
When the United Nations was formed after the Second World War, it was intended that the organization as an arena for all the countries of the world would prevent new wars from arising. If they did, the UN would quickly negotiate cease-fires and step in with peacekeeping troops as a buffer between the warring parties.
Like in Cyprus, in southern Lebanon, Bosnia and Kosovo to name a few from a huge list.
In some cases, the missions have been reasonably successful. In other cases, less so. At least the UN has tried to bring about peace.
But the UN can never be better than what the great powers allow.
When the US, China and Russia only look out for their own national interests, very little gets done.
Under normal circumstances, the Security Council had ordered Russia to immediately withdraw from occupied territories in Ukraine. But it doesn't work when Russia puts in its veto.
Despite unanimous calls for the warring parties in Lebanon to lay down their arms, Prime Minister Netanyahu announced that Israel has no plans whatsoever to stop bombing. On the contrary, the offensive will intensify.
If the rest of the Security Council wanted to order the parties to an immediate ceasefire, the US would veto it to protect its ally Israel.
The UN's hands are tied.
Even when it comes to the world's currently worst famine disaster in Sudan, the UN cannot put its foot down. The country's army and an armed militia are fighting a bitter civil war. The UN has not even succeeded in getting the two parties to let in the necessary aid shipments despite millions of people being threatened with starvation. Even less managed to negotiate a truce.
Women are not allowed to be heard
It is not only the leaders who give fine speeches at the UN during the week. There is also the occasional celebrity who wants to manifest his pathos.
For example, the actress Meryl Streep spoke about the fact that lizards have more rights in Afghanistan than women. The Islamist Taliban who rule the country have banned women from being in parks. Birds may sing but women's voices may no longer be heard in public space.
Extremely serious violations of the UN Charter's Declaration on Human Rights, which all 193 UN member states have signed.
The international community is targeting sharp sanctions against the Taliban. But the regime is partly held under the arms of Russia and China.
UN Week is an opportunity for world leaders, foreign ministers and others to have a moment in the international spotlight.
Sweden's newly appointed foreign minister, Maria Malmer Stenergard, used her 15 minutes of fame to criticize the UN, which she believed had failed both today's people and future generations by failing to protect them from war or climate threats. She also received a passage stating that only ten percent of the speakers at the UN summit are women.
What she said sounded good but does it really matter? Is anyone listening?
She presented no solutions.
The UN is currently functioning poorly, but it is the fault of a few member states rather than the world organization.
Despite the UN's paralysis of action, the world organization is the only forum that exists to solve the world's problems where all the countries of the world are represented.
When the Swedish Dag Hammarskiöld was UN Secretary General in the 50s, he said that the UN "was not created to take humanity to heaven, but to save it from hell".
Perhaps that is the yardstick we should use when reviewing the UN.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar