The package of reforms adopted by the United Nations General Assembly this week was watered down to such an extent that it serves as an example of what ails the sputtering institution.
The proposed reforms fall far short of the expectations of their creators. The diluted goals are expected to be adopted Friday during the summit of more than 150 heads of state in New York City.
While the final proposals leave much to be desired, we agree with diplomats who are whispering that they’re better than nothing. Perhaps even in a weakened form, the reforms will serve as a new beginning for a world body that has become bloated, corrupt and ineffective, yet indispensable for its legal, peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts. With serious reform, the U.N. has the potential to make a difference in the lives of so many.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan stated the obvious at the opening of the summit, saying that the document is not the “sweeping and fundamental reform” he originally proposed but merely a “good start.”
We were disappointed that the voting nations could not agree on a definition of terrorism (although they condemn it, whatever it is), would not provide firm commitments from wealthy countries to help developing ones and dropped nuclear proliferation from the final draft. And there were no details on how to overhaul a shoddy U.N. management structure.
There was agreement to create a smaller human rights council to replace the commission whose work was often stalemated by a membership that included despotic regimes. There was no agreement on the size or composition of the panel, leaving us to wonder when it might be up and running. But the budget for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (an institution separate from, and believed to be more credible than, the Human Rights Commission) will be doubled.
President Bush took a broad and “globalist,” according to one reporter, approach in his speech to the General Assembly Wednesday, calling on the U.N. to fight terrorism and nuclear proliferation, and recommitting the U.S. to aiding the world’s poor.
U.N. member nations must continue to grapple with such critical issues. The draft document put before world leaders this week will truly be a disappointment if it only calls attention to the institution’s current weakness. It should be seen as something to build on, but that will happen only if world leaders are committed to shoring up the U.N. in a spirit of global cooperation.
