Reforming the UN

Introduction

In light of the increasingly faltering credibility of the United Nations, reforms have recently been proposed to resurrect this organization, which ostensibly was founded as a peacekeeper about 60 years ago. One proposal involves the broadening of the Security Council to include new powers, with India, Brazil, Japan and Germany being the chief claimants. As expected, Pakistan is opposing India's bid to become a permanent member of the United Nations. It is certainly not difficult for her to contest India's application,for India’s human rights record in Kashmir is a little short of enviable.To top it,the performance of its judicial system after the massacre and lynching in Gujarat have further made a mockery of its claims of being democratic,secular State,having a just legal system.

Background

Founded officially in the October of 1945, two months after President Harry Truman had ordered two atomic bombs to be dropped on Japan, the United Nations was set up to institutionalize the newly acquired power of the US and the USSR, which they were going to share with the old colonial empire of UK.

However, while Stalin was content with its control of Eastern Europe, and the UK simply trying to protect its colonies from American domination (the US wanted to open these markets for its own industry), the real force behind the project remained the United States, which sought to propose and eventually dominate an all-powerful Security Council, with powers to decree international law.

The Birth Of United Nations

While the delegates were deluged with never-ending attractions (free Hollywood movies were shown daily in a special UN cinema; aerial tours of the Bay Area offered by blimp; marine excursions provided; and champagne flowed unendingly amidst the numerous dazzling receptions that were provided for the entertainment of guests), the structure took shape. Amidst this carefully orchestrated revellery, the UN took its totalitarian form. The General Assembly was given no significant policy-making powers, while the decision-making authority was concentrated in the Security Council. The discussions mainly took place between the WWII victors, i.e., the US, the UK and the USSR, with the other delegates providing a cloak of legitimacy to the proceedings through their presence and signatures - as soon as all the delegates had signed the Charter, this precious trophy was rushed in a special army plane to Washington by the Secretary General of the Conference himself.

Summary

In the 60 or so years since, the UN has served its purpose well for its chief designers, either by giving the big powers a "universal mandate" to implement agendas that had rather murky motives behind them, or by conveniently ignoring some of the worst excesses that they have committed.

Before it opened its eyes, the UN had already accepted the legitimacy of the WWII victors' rule over various colonies and satellites (e.g., Russia's domination in Eastern and Central Europe, and British rule over India). It went on to achieve much more. Its first memorable achievement was the partition of Palestine and the creation of Israel. In 1948, it effectively supervised the expulsion of Palestinians from the new Israeli state.

In the last half-century, the veto-powers have not only used the Security Council to sanction their military campaigns, but equally to defend themselves from universal opposition. Despite its overall dictatorial structure, American and Soviet representation on the UNSC ensured some degree of balance, with each countering the other on numerous occasions. After the fall of the USSR, however, the going became much easier for the axis formed by the US and UK.

More recently, we witnessed the humanitarian bombing of Afghanistan. However, since unlike Saddam Hussain, the Afghans had not invaded another country, the excuse this time was the human rights abuses carried out by the "mediaeval" and "barbaric" regime of the Taliban.

While the Security Council had passed a resolution asking Afghanistan to hand over Osama Bin Laden or face sanctions, the bombing campaign was a breach of the UN Charter in broad daylight. Chapter 7 calls for any enforcement by force of a UNSC resolution to be ratified by the UNSC first.

The most recent American invasion and then occupation of Iraq is perhaps a good time to start thinking about an obituary for the UN Charter. The world has had enough. Through the UN, it has been served so many farcical interpretations of its charter that its digestive system has finally given way. Words like "justice" or "sovereignty" do not wash down easily now. Justice was supposed to be ensured, not banned. Sovereignty was supposed to be protected, not bestowed and then taken away depending on one's acceptance or resistance to either the military or trade-related agendas of the dominant powers. When Iraq invades Kuwait, it is a violation of Kuwait's sovereignty. When the US invades Iraq, it is not.

Critical Analysis

Pakistan's response to the proposed reforms should be based on principle, and its actions geared towards opening the dictatorial structure of the Security Council to scrutiny. The proposed reforms of the UN represent an ideal opportunity to expose the injustice and inequality, which currently lie at the heart of the organization.

Conclusion

The UN has already overstayed its welcome. In fact, it is quite miraculous that it has managed to survive all these years. However, its neutrality, never there to begin with, is now openly questioned. Its officials, once considered above criticism, are now pelted with stones wherever they go. Conclusively,the U.N must steer clear of storms like the proposed reforms and sail in smooth waters if it hopes to survive in the nucleur age.



(NT:The headlines are NOT to be used in the Essay paper, but are most certainly suitable for any other, particularly Current Affairs)