Africa's role in the United Nations system

Africa and UN system

The United Nations is the result of the universal aspiration for peace and cooperation at the global level. From its inception, it was meant to be a world forum for discussing and resolving the problems facing humanity. Despite this lofty goal, in many occasions throughout its history, the world body failed to deliver on this promise. Many analysts have tried to conclude on a series of general reasons for such a failure. Aside from the universally acknowledged undemocratic decision making system in the Security Council, many have argued that the failure to assist the states in need is the outcome of the continuous lack of attention for the states that are truly in need of assistance and political support. Thus, third world countries, most of them being fragile emerging democracies, are facing constant threats to their political system, their economic situation, and the social structure. From this perspective, the reform of the United Nations may represent an opportunity for such countries to decide on a structure that would cater for their needs and problems to a larger extend than the existing one.

For centuries now, the idea of creating an international forum that would serve as a meeting place for the peoples of the world has been a goal never attained so far. The United Nations came as the recognition of decades of diplomatic and political struggles between the great powers of the world that would ultimately decide on war and peace. In 1945, the Dumbarton Oaks Agreement sealed the inauguration of what would later be the single universal forum for discussions, with an exhaustive scope, and large range of action. (Schlesinger, 2003)

One of the major points in the Charter was specifically focused on the fate of the former colonies that would be administered by a Trusteeship Council. (United Nations, art. 85) This action must be seen from a double perspective. On the one hand, it was the obvious continuation of the system set in place before 1945, through the League of Nations. The technique of the trusteeship system was in fact a reminiscence of the former League of Nations, which proved to be ineffective in dealing with issues relating to the colonial system and the territories of the defeated imperial powers. The United Nations in this sense tried to correct the errors made by its predecessor and disposed of a more relaxed and democratic control framework for the territories that had gained their independence. However, the basic idea behind the new system can be summarized as "the lines and trims are different, but basic engineering is the same." (Bennett, 1988) on the other hand, it represented the means agreed by all decision-making parties for dealing with the remaining signs of a world that had, in the U.S.'s opinion, long passed, that was the colonial period.

The historical colonial background of the U.S. determined it to take a strong stand against any possibility of maintaining the colonial system as part of any postwar agreement and reshaping of the world. (Kissinger, 1994) at the same time, the political interests of all the three major powers that decided upon the blueprint of the peacetime imposed them an attitude that eventually favored the independence, although limited, of the former colonial possessions. Therefore, the current third world countries, which in large parts represent the African continent, were from the very beginning both under the overprotective eye of a system that had from the onset limited means and capabilities, and under the scrutiny of the trusteeship powers.

This background on the issue at hand enables the proper presentation of the causes and effects of the failing UN policy towards third world countries, as well as its current results. Indeed, the highly anticipated UN reform can be seen as an opportunity for the small and poor countries to have their say in the reshaping of the institutional and political framework of the organization.

There are various causes for the failing UN diplomacy in the poor countries of Africa.

In the first place, the emerging postcolonial conflicts that occurred after the achievement of independence happened at a time when the UN was practically paralyzed by the major dispute of the Cold War between the U.S. And Russia, which reverberated in all corners of the world. Thus, in each country that had just gained its independence, there were fierce battles between the western power and the communist one. This in turn led to a power vacuum that was felt at all the levels of the society and people reacted accordingly, through the use of violent means. At this point in the conflict, the UN was unable, unauthorized, and underequipped to face up to tensions that were constantly erupting around the world. This incapacity was also felt at the level of the specialized agencies that rarely had any possibility to help those in need.

Another reason for the failure or limited success of the UN missions and the specialized agencies is the lack of a proper infrastructure, both at the local level, and at the institutional one. (Addison, 2003) the war torn countries from Africa, especially following the end of the Cold War, lack the proper road system, the special infrastructure that could enable the transportation of food supplies and needed assistance. Taking into consideration the fact that "the period 1990-2000 saw 19 major armed-conflicts in Africa, ranging from civil wars to the 1998-2000 war between Eritrea and Ethiopia," there is little possibility for the political system in the respective countries to offer support to international relief agencies in order to ease the work of the aid volunteers. (Addison, 2003) Thus, it can be said that at the institutional level, there is a constant gap of communication and political will that impends the international community to deal with the situations on the ground.

The African continent has always been perceived as an important source of cheap labor force and natural resources. In fact, it is the combination of these two elements that made the continent attractive for the British and French expeditionary forces in the 19th century. (Berstein and Milza, 1994) Therefore, little attention had been given to the political manifestations on the Black continent. During the Cold War and in the time following the fall of the Berlin Wall the atrocities of civil wars the one from Congo, the genocide from Rwanda, or the starvation in Somalia did not attract the interest of neither the international community as a whole, nor the public opinion and the private donors to the extend the situation demanded. This proved to be a decisive element in conflicts such as Rwanda or Somalia, and a pessimistic scenario is looming in the Sudanese region of Darfur. The lack of attention or concern for the state of human fellows cost the lives of millions of people and marked the future of poor countries around the world. (Russbach, 1994)

The effects of this limited reaction from the international are obvious in the current state of affairs in countries that either were affected by the civil war flagellum, or were unable to benefit from the support offered through international agencies. Eloquent examples are Angola, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea-Bissau, and Mozambique which were all destroyed by internal conflicts; yet, none of them can actually part from a war torn history. Currently, according to studies on the matter, "Mozambique has made the most economic and social progress, with sustained growth since 1994; recovery has restarted in Eritrea and Ethiopia after being knocked off course by the 1998-2000 war; and Guinea-Bissau has achieved a measure of political stability after the turmoil of the late 1990s. Angola may finally be at peace, but it will take years of hard work to ensure that the new peace agreement sticks, and does not go the way of previous (failed) agreements." (Addison, 2003) Therefore, despite serious problems and concerns, a timid evolution in the area does occur. However, taking into account the pressures, any reformist political actor is faced with in poor countries; it is questionable whether the pace and the intent of the reforms can be maintained.

To this end, the help and support of the international scene is essential for the encouragement of the stars and continuation of the progress made in African countries. Nonetheless, not always the support received from the specialized agencies of the UN and the collaborating bodies of the organization proves to have the desired effect. Thus, while the UNDP is relatively successful in some areas, it fails dramatically in others. At the same time, for instance, the International Labor Organization, one of UN's specialized agencies, aware of the great responsibility it has in promoting a new dimension for employment in African countries, still urges its collaborators to increase the possibilities for the African population to benefit from what the UNDP considers to be at the heart of poverty reduction. The Administrator of the Program for Africa underlined in a public appearance that "decent work is at the heart of development and has to be also at the heart of the United Nations various work on development." (UNDP, 2007) Therefore, the official voice of the UN draws the attention on the necessity of the societies facing difficulties that the best means possible for the re-launch of their economic segment and automatically the eradication of poverty is the share value of the work they undergo.

Despite the realistic tone of most official commentaries, the reality on the ground rarely coincides. In this respect, there are other factors as well that play a significant role in shaping the relations and evolution trends of the countries around the African continent. One of these factors is represented by the financial institutions that make up the World Bank Group. Thus, the IMF and the World Bank "are two of the most powerful international financial institutions in the world. They are the major sources of lending to African countries, and use the loans they provide as advantage to prescribe policies and dictate major changes in the economies of these countries. The World Bank is the largest public development institution in the world, lending over U.S.$22 billion in 2005 - of which almost U.S.$4 billion (or 17 per cent) went to Africa." (Africa Action, 2006) However, this continuous system of borrowing from the financial institutions creates a certain dependency on the source of money. In turn, due to the restrictive nature of the conditions imposed by the institutions, they gain access to the major decision making authorities and thus end up controlling their economies. Ultimately, it can be said that the political scene becomes gradually sensitive to the international pressures and thus looses legitimacy in front of the electorate. Argentina's situation, as one of the poorest Latin American countries in 1999, defined the IMF by refusing to pay the remaining of a loan, at the cost of starving the population. Although the people saluted the decision of the authorities, for the political ministers, it was indeed a trying experience. (the Economist, 2004)

Indeed, the situation of the African continent is a rather complex issue in the evolution of international relations. Poverty and famine must be drastically eradicated, should a better and more secure life for the African peoples be built. However, such an endeavor demands the coordination of all the parties involved. The United Nations was built especially for proving the international context for the gathering of information and of people that would set themselves in agreement over different courses of action.

At the internal level, it is important for the national, local, the private sector, and the state to fully implement and reduce the constant tensions that exist to this day among the local communities, or government, and the aid relief agencies' personnel. The national authorities should have in mind the overall interest of its population and define a series of general guidelines that should have as focus the reduction of the poverty level and the improvement of the standard of living. At the local level, the major players must be determined to put in application the procedures relevant to their line of activity and be able to coordinate the reconstruction efforts. Most importantly however, it is the state in itself that must set the overall strategy and negotiate at the international level the positioning of the country in the most advantageous conditions.

At the international level, therefore, there is a heated debate over the United Nations system and the right sharing of power among its members. The reform plans have occupied center stage from the early history of the organization, taking into account the immediate proposals of the first Secretary General to reorganize the staff and the facilities, soon after the start of the organization's work. (Luck, 2003) However, due to the inability of the UN to function properly and to deliver the results expected by the international community, the need for reform is indeed stringent. In this respect, the former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, created a panel that would inquire on the possibilities of reform, taking into consideration the current "threats, challenges and change" that the UN system would have to face.

The final report of the Panel issued a series of recommendations that "deal with a wide range of problems facing the international community (and) address such central issues of contemporary international relations as the use of force and self-defense, peacekeeping and peace enforcement, terrorism and transnational organized crime,8 weapons of mass destruction, and poverty, diseases, and environmental issues. Moreover, the panel not only recommends overhauling the work of some UN organs, but also suggests some amendments to the Charter, in addition to those necessitated by the proposed enlargement of the Security Council." (Blum, 2005)

The most vivid debate is however on the institutional reform that the UN would undergo. This is largely due to the continuous challenges over the undemocratic nature of the veto of the Permanent 5. Indeed, the vital decisions in the Organization regarding the maintenance of peace and security were focused in the Security Council, which the Major Powers would control. For their joint and individual protection each was to be able to prevent the Organization from taking measures contrary to their vital interests. (Schlesinger, 2003) in this context, the Security Council had no power to indict or condemn the wrongful doings of one of the P5. Therefore, the organization as a whole limited its scope to the rest of the world, aside from the P5. From the perspective of the rest of the UN members, it was considered to be a lack of democratic decision making and therefore most countries relied on the collective power of the General Assembly. As a result of this strategy is the Uniting for Peace UN General Assembly resolution that permitted two thirds of the expressed votes in the Assembly to annul the Security Council veto: "Uniting for Peace provides that if, because of the lack of unanimity of the permanent members of the Security Council (France, China, Russia, Britain, United States), the Council cannot maintain international peace where there is a "threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression," the General Assembly "shall consider the matter immediately...." The General Assembly can meet within 24 hours to consider such a matter, and can recommend collective measures to U.N. members including the use of armed forces to "maintain or restore international peace and security." (Ratner and Lobel, 2003) it was used in the Korean case and it was the proof that, despite the limited capacity of the General Assembly and the undemocratic system present in the Council, the will of the peoples could eventually prevail.

The proposals for the reform of the Security Council vary to a large extent. One point-of-view is the one shared by those who consider that the financial, military and economic contribution should give them a proportionate amount of power in the decision making process. (Blum, 2005) Indeed, in appearance, it is fair to consider the legal and sovereign right to decide on the fate of the national soldiers. At the same time however, there is no moral explanation for the breach of even the first articles of the Charter that stipulated the equality of all state, which includes the sovereign right of each country to benefit from an equal vote. In the case of the African nations, the situation would become truly dramatic, taking into consideration the fact that they are the biggest debtors of the Organization. In such conditions, their right to express their opinion would become irrelevant due to its limited impact on the overall decision making process.