U.N. facing uphill battle to make itself relevant

Around the world, one in five people live in countries where a great many of the citizens would not think twice about spending $2 on a cappuccino, or maybe a latte. Elsewhere around the world, one in five people survive each day on $ 1 — half that amount.

Agreat many of these people do not survive at all: In Zambia, the average person now has less chance of living to age 30 than did someone in Britain at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution back in 1840. The essential mission of the United Nations is not to prevent wars, most of which, in fact, usually get resolved one way or other by the interplay of national interests and raw power. The U. N.’ s mission is, instead, to compel the world’s wealthy to recognize just how rich they are, and how poor are the poor, and to come up with effective programs to reduce significantly the pain and the misery. To do that, the U. N. needs two qualities: It must be reasonably efficient and it must possess moral authority, so that when it takes a stand, people pay attention. The just- released report of the inquiry headed by former U. S. Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volker into the scandal of the U. N.’ s billiondollar oil- for- food program for Iraq, exposes that body as — more exactly confirms it as — unreasonably, and comprehensively, inefficient.

Volker’s report is measured and balanced. It exonerates Secretary- General Kofi Annan from any personal wrongdoing. It points out that Saddam Hussein accumulated far more money by smuggling oil outside the program ($ 11 billion) than he generated by illicit revenue within the program ($ 2 billion).

His criticisms of the U. N. and of Annan are nevertheless severe and sweeping. The administrative shortcomings were “ pervasive.” Annan, and equally his top deputy, senior Canadian civil servant Louise Frechette, failed to “ recognize their own responsibility” for the chaos and corruption. The U. N., Volker declared, “ needs thorough- going reform, and it needs it urgently.”

Something else at least as important was at issue. The absence of radical reform would “ further erode public support,” wrote Volker. It would, “ dishonour the ideals on which the United Nations is built.” What the U. N. now risks, therefore, is the loss of its moral authority. Absent that and people will cease to pay attention to it, cease to respect it, and cease to care what it does.

At one and the same moment, the timing of Volker’s report could not be worse and be better.

It is happening on the eve of the U. N.’ s special meeting of all its member countries. They are to consider Annan’s proposals for sweeping reforms in everything from the administration to its structures, such as broadening the membership of the Security Council to better represent today’s world, rather than that of a halfcentury ago, by adding new “ executive” members like Japan, India, Germany and Brazil. It is happening also at the very moment when the U. S., the U. N.’ s most powerful member, is opposing all reform except the narrowly administrative.

In an extraordinary 40- page critique of the U. N.’ s proposed reforms, the U. S. has declared itself opposed to any change that would possess what could be called moral content. The U. S. proposes to eliminate from the draft reform plan any references to “ nuclear disarmament,” or “ the use of force should be considered as an instrument of last resort,” or “ the slow and uneven” progress now being made toward reducing poverty. Washington even wants to cut out from the climate change section a reference to “ respect for nature.” The hard truth is that just about the only thing the U. N. has going for it these days is that the U. S. is against it. The U. N. now is very close to losing everything, as did its long- ago predecessor, the League of Nations. But faced with collapse, or, worse, irrelevance, the U. N. may now actually, and at last, reform itself.

It does still have a chance to do this. This is because the only alternative to it is a hegemonic U. S. that has just told the world that respecting nature and reducing poverty aren’t worth, well, a cappuccino. Richard Gwyn’s column appears Tuesday and Friday. gwynR@sympatico.ca.