-Analysis-
PARIS — There was a time when all eyes turned to the UN Security Council as soon as a conflict broke out somewhere in the world. The United Nations was the theatrical enclosure where the great powers of this world would put themselves on stage: Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader banging his shoe on the podium, or Colin Powell, the American diplomat waving his chemical vial before invading Iraq.
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
Today, we might almost forget the very existence of the Security Council, even with two major wars are underway, in Ukraine and Gaza. The United Nations is marginalized, which is what risks happening when the great powers directly or indirectly confront each other.
It is even surprising when the UN Secretary-General raises his voice to warn about the crisis in the Middle East which he’s declared: “threatens the maintenance of international peace and security”; and raises the risk of seeing in Gaza a “total collapse of law and order soon.”
Pointing fingers
Antonio Guterres announced a procedure this week that hadn’t been used for half a century: Article 99 of the UN Charter, to “bring any matter to the attention” of the Security Council.
It may seem trivial, but it is the equivalent of a loud alarm in the hushed language of diplomacy. The United Arab Emirates seized on this initiative to table a draft resolution submitted to the Security Council, demanding a ceasefire and reiterating their “call on all parties to abide by their obligations under international law.”
And it can’t be so trivial if the Israeli Foreign Minister, Elie Cohen, responded by saying the Secretary-General’s initiative constitutes: “support for the terrorist organization Hamas.” Is that all! Cohen accused Guterres directly of being “a danger to world peace.”
The UN has no autonomous means to lead any action without consensus.
The reason for this overreaction is that what is happening at the UN may put Israel’s U.S. ally in a compromising position: Will the Biden administration, which criticizes the number of civilians killed in Gaza, veto a resolution calling for a ceasefire? The battle of world opinion would well and truly be lost for Washington.
UN’s limits
What can the United Nations do? Almost nothing, to be honest, except to give moral support to a ceasefire request. The UN has no autonomous means to lead any action without consensus.
But Guterres’ gesture has the merit of forcing all actors of international life to face their responsibilities. It won’t stop the fighting immediately, but in a world where the battle is also about “narratives,” it counts.
It also allows us to reflect on a failing global governance. The League of Nations had failed to prevent World War II, and was replaced by the United Nations.
Today, the UN is showing its limits, and will have to be replaced or reformed: this means reducing the application of the veto and reinforcing the organization’s representativeness and capacity for taking concrete action. Without an effective international body, we must be ready to accept that the law of the strongest will forever prevail. That, we should remember, is the law of the jungle
