UN Reform: Missing the Point? By Jan Vandemoortele

Is the debate on UN Reform missing the point?

The multilateral system is no longer fit for purpose.

This is most visible in the handling of climate disruption. While the World keeps on disrupting the Earth; and the Earth is starting to hit back, humans keep on waging war. Humanity’s inability to address global challenges was on full display when the passengers of the virus-hit cruise schip were sent to 20+ countries, due to the deep-seated national reflex. Instead of treating them in one place, the repatriation of the passengers greatly increased the risk of widening the spread of the virus; not to mention the considerable costs involved and the extra greenhouse gas emitted. 

More multilateralism as we know it will not make much of a difference. The truth is that the UN was not established to resolve the conflict between the World and the Earth, between humanity and the planet. Instead, it was designed, imperfectly, to resolve conflicts between countries. 

Most post-war diplomats have come to believe that multilateralism is synonymous with global governance; yet international simply meant inter-state. Clinging to the traditional multilateral paradigm implies that national interests and established lobbies will always prevail over planetary needs. 

The UN Charter states that relations between nations are ‘based on the principle of sovereign equality of all its members’ (Article 2). The consequence is that we no longer view the world other than through the prism of the nation-state. But the planet is not merely the sum of nation-states. A new form of decision-making is needed to transcend the sovereignty of the nation-state and the power of corporate lobbies, who frequently hijack global debates. 

One way to reduce their influence and power is to establish a representative cross-section of the world, a Global Citizens’ Assembly. Such an assembly was successfully tested in 2021. Here is the report. The outbreak of the hantavirus on that cruise ship is likely to have been handled less irrationally had such an assembly been put in charge. 

Global Assemblies need to be multiplied, institutionalised, and strengthened. Actually, they should form a major part of the debate on UN Reform, instead of more conventional proposals about merging, cutting, restructuring, decentralisation, etc. But lack of imagination and courage on the part of our leaders makes that it is increasingly difficult to find sustainable and equitable solutions to the problems of the World and of the Earth. 

In no way does the proposal about instituting Global Assemblies mean that national borders must disappear. It simply means that a different multilateral approach is needed; one that is no longer based solely on national sovereignty and corporate interests. 

Global Assemblies will take us closer to the opening words of the UN Charter ‘We the Peoples of the United Nations’.

Jan Vandemoortele (Bruges, Belgium)