Analysis The scale of the UNSC: has it been worth it?
Alame duck, ineffectual and a victim to the political will of the world’s major powers? All criticisms levelled at the United Nations Security Council, and often they’re fair.
On Thursday, New Zealand takes the chair at the top of the world’s most powerful table - our final month-long stint as president before our two-year term draws to a close in December. What power does New Zealand really have, and has it all been worth it?
As Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully puts it, ‘‘we have the power to convene’’. That is, to set the agenda. In the context of the Security Council, that’s no small thing.
What does the Security Council do?
It is responsible for global peace and security. A major way it does this is through Peacekeeping Operations, for which the Security Council controls a massive US$8.27 billion budget.
Currently, 16 operations are in play across the globe, incorporating more than 101,000 uniformed personnel out of a total 119,523 people serving.
The council can also meet at any time the Presidency calls it, and whenever international peace is threatened - in reality, that’s nearly every day.
It makes decisions based on specific conflicts or threats, but it also makes decisions on ‘‘thematic’’ issues, like humanitarian assistance. New Zealand is a ‘‘penholder’’ on humanitarian issues, with the responsibility to help set much of the agenda in that area.
The decisions of the Security Council come in the form of resolutions, which are legally binding.
They fail to make decisions a lot though, don’t they?
This is a heavy criticism, and it’s completely valid. Sadly, this often applies to some of the most devastating and intractable conflicts - such as the one in Syria.
More often than not, it’s the result of opposing geo-political games between Russia and the US again this has meant the five-year Syrian war has only gotten worse.
That’s not to say the Security Council doesn’t clock up success. But where it fails to, the effects are devastating for millions of civilians living in war-torn countries.
The haunting picture of fiveyear-old Syrian Omran Daqneesh face bloodied and stunned into silence after an air strike flattened his home - sparked outrage throughout the world and in the Security Council last week.
The Dominion Post was present during a briefing to the council on the failed efforts to get food and medical aid into Syrians living in Aleppo. All countries mentioned little Omran.
But statements between the US and Russia over who was to blame and what should happen differed greatly. It makes it difficult to progress any talks on ending the war.
Where it came to humanitarian assistance, Russia and Syria have agreed to a 48-hour ‘‘humanitarian pause’’ to deliver aid into besieged areas - that was agreed to on August 18, security assurances were received on the 22nd and a major operation began on the 23rd. The Security Council can affect fast change when it wants to.
UN Peacekeeping missions operating in Sierra Leone and Burundi have been hailed as major success stories.
But the Security Council is largely seen to have left regions like Rwanda and Srebrenica to their own fate - mass genocide.
What hand will NZ deal?
The aforementioned conflict in Syria is New Zealand’s centrepiece agenda item. New Zealand’s ambition in the area has drawn bemusement among major powers.
But our strategy to gain advancement is to look at it through a humanitarian lens - it’s difficult to let political posturing prevent aid from reaching the millions of Syrians in need.
Prime Minister John Key said New Zealand would like to gain a resolution to make progress in the region.
That is unlikely to advance U.N. efforts forward significantly, but securing any kind of commitment of responsibility from major world powers is an achievement and worth pursuing.
New Zealand has also indicated it will convene the world’s powers to discuss aviation security and terrorism, and nuclear nonproliferation.
‘‘If we could get some form of resolution [on Syria] that would continue to lend support to the people of Syria and resolve some of the issues that they have there, that would be useful,’’ Key said.
‘‘But I think it’s one of those things where it’s a difficult and delicate process. We have to be realistic that there’s a number of interested parties, and there’s a number of countries very actively involved.’’
It’s easy to write these issues off as having little to do with New Zealand, or impossible for New Zealand to solve.
That doesn’t mean we don’t try. As a country luck enough to not know that kind of conflict, it’s not whether it’s worth it, we feel a responsibility.