The United Nations Organisations Effect On The Conduct Of Diplomacy - Essay Example

THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION’S EFFECT ON THE CONDUCT OF DIPLOMACY of Date: THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION’S EFFECT ON THE CONDUCT OF DIPLOMACY Introduction The United Nations Organization (UNO) was formed after World War II, and came into being officially in October 1945. “It was formed to replace the League of Nations, which gained the dubious distinction of failing to restrain aggressive dictators like Hitler and Mussolini” (Okoth 2006, p.353). The UNO with its 192 member states, recognizes the sovereign rights of its members. The Organization was founded under the international treaty of the United Nations Charter for the purpose of fulfilling four goals. These include the maintenance of peace and international security; development of friendly relations between nations; achievement of international cooperation by resolving international problems and by encouragement of respect for human rights; and being a centre where the efforts of nations are harmonised. With headquarters in New York, the United Nations Organization has a significant presence in Geneva, Vienna and Nairobi, according to the Federal Office of Communications (2005). Various international organizations and agencies help the UNO in conducting world affairs more successfully among countries, and in preventing conditions of anarchy or disorder in all regions of the world (Thakur 2001). “One of the main purposes of the United Nations Organization is the maintenance of international peace and security” (Acuna 1995, p.1). Besides peace-keeping, the United Nations Organization is also responsible for the maintenance of diplomacy among the different member countries. One of the key components of the United Nations is the Security Council which is conferred with wide-ranging powers by the United Nations’ member countries. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the ways in which the United Nations Organisation affects the conduct of diplomacy. Impact of the United Nations Organization on Diplomacy The United Nations Organization is at the legislative and normative centre of numerous international organizations that influence the everyday life of people across the globe, in several different ways. The United Nations Organization heads several Subsidiary Bodies, Programmes and Funds, Functional and Regional Commissions, Standing Committees, Expert Bodies, Specialized Agencies and other organizations. Specialized Agencies include the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the World Bank group, and other international bodies (UN, 2012). In the new millennium, with the birth of a new era in world affairs, “the United Nations is the focus of hopes and aspirations for a future where men and women live at peace with themselves and in harmony with nature” (Thakur 2000, p.2). The sad reality of the twentieth century was a record of the highest levels of man’s inhumanity to fellow man and his destruction of nature. Sustained success in consolidating gains and reducing setbacks requires people across the globe to make an increased commitment to the vision and values of the United Nations Organisation; and use the UN forum and functions for international collaboration and peace. The United Nations Organisation has the right to take criminal actions against human rights violators. For many human rights and humanitarian problems, there is no alternative for patient diplomacy, which over the long term educates across generations. There is extensive evidence to indicate that progressive ideas make a difference over time. For example, slavery, colonialism, South African apartheid, European Stalinism, inhuman cultural practices such as foot binding among Chinese women, and other issues have been brought to an end. In contemporary times there is increasing focus on women’s rights, racial discrimination, liberal democracy and other human rights issues. As an intergovernmental organisation, for the United Nations to maintain diplomacy and work towards resolving human rights issues, it can only achieve as much as its most powerful members permit. Thus, the requirement has to be met for educating member states on the need for increased protection of human rights and humanitarian standards. Depending on the politics of the particular circumstances, it will be required to hold conferences and implement actions against racism, xenophobia and other controversial human rights issues across the world (Thakur 2000). The lack of support to the organisation from the United States is a challenge, having to deal with the super power’s claim to absolute sovereignty and its periodic suspicion of the compromises it will be required to make in true multilateral diplomacy. Thakur (2000) supports this view, adding that the United States’ foreign policy was extremely problematic for the United Nations, “and the organisation would require diplomatic skill and patience in trying to moderate some of these policies over time” (p.231). The United Nations human rights programmes and other projects were adversely impacted by these approaches of the United States. The United Nations Organisation’s 21st Century Diplomacy Contemporary diplomacy is to a great extent related to civil society versus the state. The bipolar international system that developed after World War II has concluded with the demise of the Soviet Union, changing diplomacy from its “emphasis on bilateral negotiations between superpowers to a more genuine multilateral diplomacy reflecting the diffusion of political power in the world today” (Reitano & Elfenbein 1999, p.234). Ground-breaking new developments in telecommunications and transportation have reduced the powers of state authority by eliminating the state’s monopoly on information. Further, there is a growing dependence on non-state bodies such as Non- Governmental Organisations also known as NGOs for guidance, drafting, and implementation of declarations, platforms and treaties on vital international concerns such as human rights, the environment, the increasing presence of land mines, and other issues. Moreover, there is a renewed emphasis on working through the United Nations system to resolve intrastate conflicts and to determine new methods of human security. In the new millennium, a “new world order” appears to have been introduced, with developments of unprecedented forms of political, social and economic order in global affairs. It is likely that the development of an international civil society is unfolding in contemporary times. This will destroy the style of diplomacy that was more appropriate to bygone times (Reitano & Elfenbein 1999). The international system is in transformation, and dangers may emerge due to ‘failed states’ and ethnicbased intrastate conflicts, clashes of civilizations, and compulsions to upgrade and modernise. These are expected to occur with all the attendant cultural and environmental problems. The future of diplomacy and the prospects of system transformation are difficult to determine in the circumstances “when nation-states are making unrealistic demands on and unreasonable criticisms of the international system’s most important multilateral diplomatic institution, the United Nations” (Reitano & Elfenbein 1999, p.235). Taking into consideration civil society and the United Nations, bilateral agreements will be unable to correct the predicaments which exist across the globe. Hence, multilateral diplomacy is considered to be a more effective tool for resolving global issues of the post-Cold War world. After the Cold War concluded, there was an increasing hope that “International, regional, and subregional intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) can fulfill the potential that so many people attach to them” (Reitano & Elfenbein 1999, p.235), raising expectations of the United Nations in almost every dimension and aspect including security, human rights and the environment. For the United Nations Organisation to uphold peace and soundly established governance systems, it should have the capability to encourage peaceful change toward liberal democracy. The organisation needs to employ “preventive diplomacy, peacemaking, peace-keeping, peace-enforcement, and peace building in wartorn and authoritarian states” (Peou 2001, p.92). Preventive diplomacy helps to resolve conflicts before they explode into violent clashes. Peacemaking includes various forms of diplomatic action for managing or resolving conflict before or after the beginning of warfare. Peace-keeping operations employ United Nations military personnel from member states, separating adversaries towards restoring peace while integrating the three approaches of consent, impartiality and the limited use of force for self-defense. When peacemaking or peacekeeping efforts fail, peace enforcement is carried out by military action or intervention of United Nations’ authorized armed forces of member states. After the conflict comes to an end, peace building is undertaken; it is an international effort with a wider purpose than peace-keeping, with the international community working to increase national governance in areas such as “creating or strengthening national institutions, monitoring elections, promoting human rights, providing for reintegration and rehabilitation programmes, and creating conditions for resumed development” (Peou 2001, p.92). The entire United Nations system has extensively contributed to the process of peace building in the developing world. For example, the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has worked to fulfill the increasing demands of developing countries in the different regions of the world. Regional economic or economic-social commissions have been established in “Europe, Asia, and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean” (Peou 2001, p.92). Thus, there is renewed enthusiasm towards the United Nations Organisation with respect to international peace and security. Reitano and Elfenbein (1999) present a contrasting argument. They state that the Cold War was followed by harmony among the Security Council’s five permanent members, which led to a radical rise in United Nations peacekeeping operations and peace missions. At the same time, raised expectations for resolution of post-Cold War conflicts by the United Nations quickly diminished when peace keeping missions began to struggle in the accomplishment of their task. Both internally and externally there has been increasing criticism of the various peacekeeping activities of the United Nations. According to critics, the Security Council has irresponsibly begun peacekeeping exercises without taking into consideration the required finances, logistics, troop deployments, and most significantly, the authorization to undertake the mission. There is increasing discomfort expressed by several countries regarding this aspect of multilateral diplomacy because of the belief that in these missions there is frequently an absence of the necessary support required to achieve success, especially from the United States, in political, diplomatic, financial, and moral terms. The former secretary-general Boutros-Ghali condemned the tendency of member states especially the superpowers of making a scape-goat of the United Nations Organisation. He argued that member states should not use the UN to avoid a problem and then blame the United Nations for failure in solving it. Throughout his tenure, Boutros-Ghali (1996, p.95) argued that “mandates given to the United Nations itself should be clear, realistic and backed by the human resources required to complete the assigned task successfully”. Bhoutros-Ghali’s perspective has received support for its identification of the complexity of most post-Cold War conflicts, which cannot be easily resolved through the United Nations. Additionally, it is seen as unreasonable to expect the United Nations to resolve these conflicts taking into consideration the rising demands on the organisation. These pertain to the decline in resources available to carry out its activities, and its “inadequate political authority to make its decisions truly binding on all member states” (Reitano & Elfenbein 1999, p.236). States also approached the United Nations on a series of other matters through global conferences to address “problems of a global magnitude which Member States recognized had grown beyond the individual capacities to solve and which needed a concerted international effort” (UNDP 1997, p.1) for which conferences were convened. Although this perspective in multilateral diplomacy has its critics, it is found that some important solutions have been found for complex, international economic and social problems such as “sustainable development, human rights, shelter and food” (Reitano & Elfenbein 1999, p.236). These conferences have been commended for successfully raising consciousness, setting agendas after obtaining agreement on action from Member States, with later follow-up regarding their conference commitments, and ensuring help for the countries that require support in realising their commitments. The United Nations’ Preventive Diplomacy Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali was appointed soon after the Cold War came to a close, and hopes of a new world order arose. Like his predecessors, Boutros-Ghali practiced preventive diplomacy in situations such as the war between Eritrea and Yemen, and he promoted the launching of the very first preventive deployment of United Nations peacekeepers in the former Yugoslav Republic of Madedonia. Secretary-General Kofi Annan helped to further advance the work done by earlier secretary-generals of the United Nations Organisation. “He exercised preventive diplomacy successfully in the border conflict between Cameroon and Nigeria over the Bakassi Peninsula” (Ramcharan 2011). The current Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has further developed the practice of preventive diplomacy at the United Nations. He has led the issue of global climate change along the lines of preventive diplomacy, and also submitted reports to the General Assembly on preventive diplomacy. Both peacekeeping and preventive diplomacy are conventional activities of the United Nations Organisation. On the other hand, “peace enforcement, humanitarian intervention, and multidimensional peace operations, which may include elements of all these categories” (Sullivan 1999, p.50) are more recent developments, and have existed particularly after the Cold War. To prevent conflict situations from becoming unmanageable crises, timely intervention is crucial. Preventive diplomacy is particularly valuable in multilateral diplomacy. The contemporary world is one in which external intervention is required when groups of people need protection from those who govern them, as well as from each other. The United Nations is considered as the most appropriate instrument for undertaking such interventions (Sullivan 1999). Although preventive action is related to military intervention, nonmilitary action are employed such as mediation and convocation which is an extended form of mediation in which all the key actors in a conflict are brought together to resolve the dispute. “The United Nations has unique capabilities and enormous potential for organising nonmilitary intervention” (Sullivan 1999, p.50). This ability should be used more efficiently for optimal outcomes in future. For this purpose, the former United Nations Secretary-General Javier Perez De Cuellar argued that conflict situations should be brought to the organisation early enough so that their further development of crisis can be curtailed, and suitable action taken. Conclusion This paper has highlighted the United Nations Organisation and investigated its conduct of diplomacy. The organisation’s twenty-first century diplomacy and its use of preventive diplomacy have been examined. The United Nations Organisation’s purpose of promoting peace and sound systems of governance will require a peaceful change towards liberal democracy. With the combined, multilateral approaches of preventive diplomacy, peacemaking, peace-keeping, peace-enforcement and peace building in authoritarian and war-torn states, the organisation’s goals can be achieved. It is evident that the United Nations is criticised for its peacekeeping operations as poorly planned and lacking in forethought. These shortcomings have to be overcome for improved functioning of the organisation. The United Nations’ policy of preventive diplomacy as a part of multilateral diplomacy, and its use of non-military actions are considered as valuable in conflict prevention. Sullivan (1999, p.50) supports this view, and adds that “a crisis anywhere may become a crisis everywhere, and a crisis prevented is a calamity avoided”. It is concluded that the United Nations Organisation’s preventive diplomacy along with its peacekeeping, peacemaking and peace enforcement are crucial in this era of increased globalisation. . -------------------------------- Bibliography Acuna, TF 1995, The United Nations Mission in El Salvador: A humanitarian law perspective, Volume 14 of Legal Aspects of International Organization, The Netherlands, Kluwer Law International. Boutros-Ghali, B 1996, ‘Global leadership after the Cold War’, Foreign Affairs, vol.75, no.2, pp.86-98. Federal Office of Communications 2005, United Nations Organisation, UNO, Federal Administration Department of Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications, viewed 8 March 2012, Okoth, A 2006, A history of Africa: African nationalism and the decolonisation process, Nairobi, East African Publishers. Peou, S 2001, Security-community building for better global governance, in Global governance and the United Nations System, Rittberger, V (ed)., New York, United Nations University Press. Ramcharan, B 2011, Preventive diplomacy at the United Nations, United Nations Chronicle, viewed on 8 March 2012, UNDP (United Nations Development Program) 1997, Reconceptualizing governance, Discussion Paper 2, United Nations Development Program, New York. Read More