As our nation observes the 50th anniversary of the birth of the United Nations, three facts stand out:
– First, the United States continues to have a major stake in the success of the UN system.
– Second, UN members must reform the organization to seize the opportunities and meet the demands of a new era.
– Third, isolationist trends within both parties in the U.S. Congress may–unless vigorously opposed–damage seriously the UN and our interests.
A half century ago, bipartisan U.S. leadership helped launch the UN; it matters a great deal whether bipartisan leadership is forthcoming now to sustain it. Here are some reasons to care:
The UN builds security by helping to prevent conflicts in strategic areas, such as Cyprus and the Middle East; through sanctions, it attaches a price to the lawless behavior of rogue states; it helps to keep nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands; and through the UN’s General Assembly and Security Council, it provides a bully pulpit for the dissemination worldwide of American views.
UN programs, such as UNICEF, serve our interest in a more civilized world by feeding the hungry, caring for refugees and fighting epidemic disease.
The UN has become a powerful force for democracy and human rights; aiding democratic transitions from Cambodia to El Salvador to South Africa; and launching the first war crimes tribunals since Nuremburg.
In short, the UN performs a host of valuable functions; unfortunately, it does not perform them as efficiently as it should. In this era, successful governments and corporations downsize, set rigorous priorities, stress accountability and focus on the bottom line. Not surprisingly, the UN bureaucracy resists reinvention. So UN members must insist.
Steps forward already have been taken. An inspector general has been created; a tough new under secretary general for management has trimmed the budget and installed a merit-based staff appraisal system; and major reforms in procurement are planned.
Our goal is to move into the 21st Century with a smaller, more focused, more accountable UN that is clear about its objectives and able to get results.
But, as Secretary of State Warren Christopher has pointed out, it is impossible “to retreat and reform at the same time.” And while the U.S. and others are striving to improve the UN, legislation pending in Congress would gravely wound it. Radical proposals would kill UN peacekeeping and slash our contributions to UN programs. The enactment of these measures would isolate America in an era when international cooperation is essential.
Consider the consequences. If UN peackeeping is choked off, we could expect even wider war in the Balkans, higher tensions in tinderbox regions such as Cyprus and the Middle East, a renewed threat to democracy in Haiti and a further series of humanitarian disasters in Africa.
If UN programs are squeezed out or shut down because America fails to pay its bills, a whole range of global goals would be set back, from child immunization, to controlling pollution, to emergency relief, to containing deadly diseases such as AIDS and the Ebola virus.
Either the wise heads in both parties prevail in support of policies for strengthening, reforming and downsizing the UN system, or we will see a divisive and destructive debate that harms U.S. prestige and leaves the UN less able to address problems that matter to our citizens.
For five decades, Democratic and Republican administrations alike have recognized that UN programs and capabilities yield benefits America could not achieve by acting alone; and they are among the building blocks of a more free, prosperous and secure world. Other nations share our desire to see a UN system that wastes less and produces more. But, they are unlikely to follow our lead unless they believe our goal is to create a UN that is not just cheaper, but better.
Never forget: the UN emerged not from a dream, but a nightmare. In the 1920s and ’30s, the world squandered an opportunity to organize the peace. The result was Holocaust and a World War.
The generation that defeated Hitler was determined to an enduring foundation of peace, law and dignity. The UN was at the center of their efforts. Today, we must choose: to carry forward their vision, or to turn inward and betray it.
That is not a partisan or ideological choice. It is a choice for which our entire generation will be held accountable.
