FOLLOW US
M.R. Sharma: The United States, the United Nations and International Conflicts
Written by Murari Raj Sharma, Vice-President, United Nations General Assembly
Wednesday, January 23, 2002
Delivered at an International Symposium on the United States and the United Nations, “Exploring the Future of U.S.-U.N. Relations,” January 23, 2002
Whenever we speak of international conflict, we instinctively mention in the same breath the United States and the United Nations. This is natural because people around the world see the roles that they play: the United States as the foremost global power, and the United Nations as the organization charged with the responsibility of preventing war.
War and peace
Conflict, as well as the quest for peace, is as old as civilization itself. Our psyche has been conditioned to think, to interact, and to respond to the events and challenges in the ways that we do. It is a catalyst of human evolution. Tribal societies evolved into nation states through conquest, co-optation and contract, with coercion and cooperation. Religions, cultures, ideologies, treaties, and alliances have been used as tools to broaden the horizon of human bonds and consciousness and to widen the scope of war, as well as to advance the prospects of peace. Science and technology have shrunk the world by transforming the bows and arrows into weapons of mass destruction, with their intercontinental delivery systems and by weaving the world together with trade and communications. These developments have made the world interdependent and humanity indivisible both in war and in peace.
It is the nature of the human pursuit of progress to try to create defenses, in order to deter the appetite for destruction. Yet conflict has frequently afflicted societies through the ages. The twentieth century was the bloodiest and scariest in history, with two world wars and the Cold War. World War II, in particular, cast the world in flames, and we witnessed unprecedented devastation, deprivation, atrocities and misery. From the ashes of WWII, the United Nations was created to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. The United States, the dominant world power, led the drive to establish the world body, assumed permanent membership of the Security Council, and became the highest contributor to the U.N. budget. It remains one of the principal arbiters of world peace.
United Nations and the world climate
The United Nations, like other human endeavors, has failed to achieve everything it stands for because of its inherent internal structural and procedural weaknesses, as well as the environment in which it functions. Ever since its founding, the United Nations has engaged in fire-fighting from one conflict situation to the next in an inclement international security climate. No sooner did it come into existence than the Cold War cast a dark shadow over the organization. It sounded the death knell for the balance of power doctrine, as the two blocs amassed nuclear arsenals ready for mutually assured destruction, bringing the planet to the verge of annihilation. The world bodies had to ensure nuclear non-proliferation and try to contain other weapons of mass destruction, while at the same time deal with proxy wars in the third world, between the two bloc’s client states. Such clientele was built on the strength of weapons, preferential aid, trading opportunities and even personal favors to their leaders from their patrons. It was an incredibly volatile situation.
The end of the Cold War removed external threats between the two camps that had kept intrastate conflicts mostly at bay. Consequently, such conflicts between races, ethnic groups, religions, languages and regions mostly in poorer parts of the world proliferated, with which the United Nations is now confronted. They, as interstate wars, engendered as they are by a blend of unmet needs and the clash of interests and values where no one wins, but humanity looses, have queered the pitch for peace that many had hoped the post-Cold War period would see. Founded to deal with wars between states, the world body has had to improvise the ways and means to address the new peace and security challenges of old provenance. For in the contemporary world, conflicts within states, as conflict between states, have serious ramifications for regional and international peace and security.
One nation, many responsibilities
The United States remains the greatest nation on earth, militarily, politically and economically, particularly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which could not keep pace with its much richer rivals. With greatness comes responsibility. Respect and envy are as incidental to greatness as are resentment and hostility. But none of them should divert America’s attention from the mission it has to undertake as world leader. The United States will find many friends to join hands with in its high mission.
At present it has the power and resources to induce disputing parties to find resolution to conflict, and to promote development and justice. That is why, whenever a civil war breaks out and people die of hunger, or whenever a war erupts between two states in a distant corner of the world, the United States, rightly or wrongly, is perceived as having had a hand in it. It is expected to help resolve the situation or it is blamed for not doing anything or not doing enough. This symbolizes more the recognition that overwhelming American strength has to influence global events, and less the intention to place the blame on America’s doorstep.
It is interesting to listen to fervent debates in the United States about America’s engagement with the world. As I see it, there are three streams of argument. Some suggest that America should engage with the world unilaterally whenever its vital interests are at stake or jeopardized. Others argue for an isolationist role. The third stream calls for constructive and consistent interface with the world.
Nuclear non-proliferation and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction, stamping out terrorism, building a national missile defense, and sustaining its military superiority top the American security agenda today. America is also painstakingly working to maintain its economic lead and political influence, to promote democracy and freedoms and to tackle crimes and environmental degradation on the planet. In all these areas, U.S. interests are best served by working with other nations and through international organizations. The reason why is simple. The United States will not be able to influence events in which it is not involved and it cannot always mount unilateral actions to protect and advance its interests in the world. For instance, the endeavor to take out the al Qaeda terrorist network has in itself required cooperation and support from nearly 60 countries.
The United States and enlightened self-interest
Isolationism is simply out of the question for the United States because it cannot abandon its vital global interests: commercial, political, and strategic that are critical to maintaining its foremost place in the community of nations. Evidently, the United States, as I see it, would do well by fully engaging with the world, bringing its leadership and resources to bear on the task of preventing conflicts, resolving disputes, promoting development, and augmenting justice for all. Working in close collaboration with the world would be in the enlightened self-interest of the American people and it will be in keeping with their exceptional generosity and incredible pragmatism. It will also be a America’s great contribution to humanity as a whole.
The September 11 terrorist attack on the United States was a glaring example of bigotry, hatred, intolerance, ignorance, and fear of diversity, which must be removed by building defenses in the minds of people where they are born. As we respond to the immediacy of fighting terrorism, we must not forget the urgency of addressing the constituencies, if not the root causes, of conflict and terrorism: poverty, ignorance, injustice, exclusion, and frustration that beset poor countries. In the global village that is the world today, neglected problems of poverty, abuse and crisis in one country might very easily evolve into the security problem of others. It is only a matter of time before their consequences find their way even onto distant shores.
Domestic structures, processes, and personalities determine the potential for conflict as well as the prospects for peace and good government. The United States should continue to inspire other countries to strengthen democracy, transparency, liberalization, and human rights. It should foster open societies and markets and interdependent economies. All of these will work as powerful restraints on conflict and catalysts to progress. To do so is not an act of altruism. It would be a magnanimous U.S. investment in the collective advancement of human worth and dignity and in expanded markets and economic opportunity for everyone.
United States and United Nations goals and interests
The United Nations remains an important instrument to realize American foreign policy goals, to legitimize its actions abroad when necessary, to share the cost of keeping the peace, and to safeguard its markets, supplies, and influence. A weakened, ineffective United Nations means more costly involvement for America in world trouble spots. It is a complete misconception to think that the United Nations is a forum hostile to America because the majority votes with the United States more than 85 percent of the time on resolutions in the General Assembly. The adoption and implementation of Security Council Resolution 1373 is a concrete example of how the United Nations and the global community are willing to work closely with America on serious issues of shared concern.
Therefore, outsiders often find it difficult to fathom American ambivalence in its support for an organization that it helped create and that has remained invariably considerate and even complying on virtually all issues critical to the United States. This U.S. attitude largely contributes to undermining the United Nations, which needs enhanced capacity to mount preventive diplomacy, quick deployment of forces and robust missions, as well as the financing for them, in order to avoid a costly aftermath. A stronger United Nations will work to the United States’ best advantage.
The American people understand the symbiotic need the United States and the United Nations have for each other, and yet there is persistent ambiguity in official America towards the United Nations. Many analysts seek an explanation in U.S. domestic political dynamics, which might also explain the often-lukewarm American engagement in resolving the Middle East problem and its walking away from Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out. Settlement of the Middle East problem and the reconstruction of Afghanistan, many believe, will raise hope among the Palestinians, and take out the steam from extremist elements in the Islamic world, which they have been able to exploit against the West.
In a fundamentally anarchic system of states, small nations are vulnerable even to minor threats and crises. America should pay particular attention to preserving their sovereignty, security, and stability, and to stimulating their development. Enforcement of the rule of law in international relations and commitment of the great powers to ensure it, will go a long way toward assuring small states of their security and viability. Realists and liberals may have different perceptions about the extent to which intra-state problems could be amenable to peaceful resolution or about the utility of non-state actors in addressing them. But many times we have witnessed that disputing parties respond to incentives, both positive and negative, as well as mediation and facilitation, especially when they are exhausted or when they begin to see further and clearer where their ultimate interests lie or how their moral standing is being impacted.
America has proven time and again that it has the will and capacity to win without a fight. It has displayed time and again a determination to fight back when its interests are trampled. The world is eagerly awaiting similar American leadership in galvanizing the community of nations to address new conflicts and remove the poverty and ignorance that fuel them. The United Nations should remain a reliable partner and a useful framework to share the enormous burden that America is expected to carry as the greatest nation on earth.