CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND PROPOSED
RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
«Just as it was illusory in the 18th
century to re-propose the Athenian model on a national scale, so too today it
is equally illusionary to re-propose national models of democracy and
representative institution at an international scale.» John Negri
[2005:6].
The current neo-Westphalian world order, characterized by
complex interdependencies rather than simple linear causality models, shapes
global international relations. This new paradigm has reinforced pleas for the
revisiting of multilateralism and for an aggiornamento of the UNSC to the new
international relations discourse. The principles and purposes of the UNSC, as
set out in the U.N Charter, remain as valid and relevant today as they were in
1945. While purposes should be firm and principles constant, the UNSC and
practice thereof, must move with time. The growing challenges facing today's
global society can only be resolved through coordinated and multilateral
efforts. Considering its mudis operandi, the UNSC is called upon to
address conflicts from a comprehensive approach. The major problem has been
that the current UNSC composition does not reflect the dramatic political and
economic changes that have occurred in global society in the last sixty years.
This situation is believed to have resulted in unevenness in the UNSC's
response to and interest in various conflicts. However, despite
résistance from the current P-5, for the UNSC's decisions to command
international respect and promote international political progress as well as
international law, restore the U.N legitimacy and credibility, finding a
formula which does not threaten P-5's interests, but treats all U.N members
equally, remains a sine qua non criterion.
From a relatively homogenous outlook on global challenges, to
an extremely diverse, a more UNSC representative by the U.N family of nations
would enhance global international peace and security conferred thereto by the
U.N Charter. However, while the UNSC's decisions command worldwide respect, the
need for increasing veto power is a noble idea, to achieve this goal under the
current anarchical power struggle-ridden international system by adopting AU
formula as Chapter four has patently demonstrated remains a myth. As Chapter
four has revealed, the current UNSC reform conundrum results from the fact that
the UNSC, an arena where states faithfully pursue their national policies and
priorities according to the larger
realities and forces governing world politics, states are
pulling in opposing directions. Thus, making the AU formula unworkable. The
question of who would get a seat on an expanded UNSC, and with what powers,
remains contentious. In the absence of a clear set of objective criteria for
UNSC membership, consensus among states and agreed upon formula, jockeying at
the UNSC for any new veto-wielding seat will remain a farce.
The UNSC reform exercise as it has proved, the P-5 members'
vested interests will often lead them to oppose the AU blueprint. Like all
conflict-riven politics, the UNSC reform has become a complex process of
bargaining, jostling, posturing and outright threats, reconciling divergent
interests, as well as different views of the world and preferences on how
global institution should be organized. With specific reference to the veto
provision, it has become clear that in 1945, the U.N Charter was drafted to
safeguard the core interests of the Great Powers who were involved in its
drafting. Hence, the incumbent five veto-wielding members are unlikely to view
with favour any incursion of new members into their privileged sphere, unless
they believe that such situation serves their respective interests as witnessed
in 1965.
Since the establishment of the U.N, many reform proposals have
been proposed. In practical, however, substantive and substantial reform has
proved virtually impossible. This is because throughout the U.N existence,
states have been experiencing insurmountable obstacles. The P-5 constantly
erected a barrage of résistance that successfully thwarted any
meaningful reform in veto-wielding membership category. These obstacles
successfully prevent any possibility of amending the fundamental pillars of the
U.N Charter, especially Article 108 which requires the affirmative concurrence
of all P-5. Although it was hoped the 60th UNGA Summit would alter
the status quo, the beneficiaries thereof, stood firmly. The overall outcome
was described by AU members as disappointing. The UNGA outcome underpins the
sentiments that world politics is characterized above all by egotistical states
operating in an anarchical environment. This epitomizes power drive of
nation-states operating without higher authority. These P-5's résistance
to UNSC reform clearly illustrates states drive to maximize power as both ends
and means. It is a clear indication that in international politics, power is
not shared voluntarily, and negates idealists' beliefs that states have been
satisfied to share power rather than persistently fighting for it. All in all,
as propounded by realist theorists, it illustrates how international
politics remains a continuous struggle among states seeking to
dominate each other in the conduct of their own affairs.
Proposed Recommendations
The veto has been a sturdy pillar in the foreign policies of
the P-5. In the event that veto becomes difficult to get or abolish, the AU
must mobilize pressure and persuasion to get P-5 members limit their veto use,
especially in cases of genocide, Charter amendment, appointment of the U.N
Secretary General and other grave human rights abuses. Vetoes should only be
allowed on peacekeeping and enforcement measures. Similarly, the 186
non-permanent states should make joint efforts to limit other special P-5
privileges, such as claims on high Secretariat posts and World Court seats. The
AU must approach the G-4, which is a powerful and influential group and blend
their proposals by reaching a compromise and abandon their quest for permanency
with veto power before their acceptance into the `inner circle' [UNSC]. To this
end, they can provide major diplomatic muscle in this veto-restriction
effort.
While the UNSC reform is important for Africa, African unity
is equally vital. The go-it alone strategy practiced by some countries, such as
Nigeria and South Africa may further jeopardize the continent's quest for two
veto permanent seats. Throughout this reform discussion, there has been growing
opposition among African countries that believe the AU proposal would diminish
their chances for a seat on the UNSC, or that oppose a regional rival's ascent
to power. The strength of the continent is the ability to speak with one voice
and its ability to act together. African unity must emerge, Heads of states and
Government must be committed to this reform, not just in words, but also by
deeds. This is because opposition within region assures broad opposition
outside the continent and guarantees defeat for the aspirants, especially, in
the UNGA voting process.
It is imperative for the AU to revitalize the Non-Aligned
Movement [NAM] forces. NAM states increasingly voted together during the years
prior to the first reform vote indicating that they had the numerical ability
not only to sway resolutions favored by either the U.S or the USSR, but also
sufficient numbers to pass resolutions favored by neither of the Great
Powers.
Since the resolution to amend the U.N Charter requires only a
two-thirds majority, the NAM states would have more than enough votes to
increase their own power and representation on the UNSC. Although with the
increased membership arising after the break-up of the USSR, as diagram 4.1
shows, Asian and African numerical strength can still exercise influence by
continuing to work together.
For the UNSC to fulfill the aspirations of a truly benign new
world order, there is a need for search of a balancing point, within a
reasonable amount of time, so that the UNSC may truly reflect the strong points
of the international community and become an instrument for a more effective
and universal action. Since the expansion of the UNSC is a geo-political
contest for power and influence, the UNSC reform architects must recognize
that, akin to AU proposal, crafting a reform framework, which creates
additional veto power without outside support, will undoubtedly be a long and
arduous road. Although it is important for the UNSC to become an inclusive
organ of the U.N which treats all states equally as stipulated in the U.N
Charter, such veto-creating proposal uncorroborated by the P-5 will always
remain a myth. Reform will not occur unless the current veto-wielding permanent
members and those outside the UNSC sphere genuinely pursue it. Otherwise, the
UNSC system will remain a political arena where the strong do as they can and
the weak suffer what they must.
|