[font=Times New Roman] The Reform of the UN
[font=Times New Roman] By Tarek Masud
[font=Times New Roman]
[font=Times New Roman]Faced with growing criticism from people around the globe, at last it seems that the outfit of the UN, world’s largest organization, is about to change slightly. Though the western media has been portraying it as reform attempt, but taking into account whatever has been learned regarding the proposals so far tabled it will be more appropriate to call it a change of outfit. The change has become imperative in order to present the discriminatory structure and the unethical charter of this organization to the world with new and more acceptable outer shell. After learning the lessons from the Second World War this organization basically started its journey with patronization from the US, Britain and France right after the end of the Second World War. This international organization was founded with the goal of preventing another world war because of the conflict of interests of the five super powers. In other words, the purpose was to establish and retain their dominance through mutual understanding among the super powers. It was the reason why the then Soviet Union and later communist China was given equal share of the fundamental powers of the organization. It should be mentioned that according to the charter of this organization the fundamental authority of the organization has been vested in the Security Council and the US, Britain, France, Russia (then Soviet Union) and China are the permanent members of the Security Council. The UN charter has granted veto power to these super powers. It means no resolution can be passed against the will of these dominant powers. As a result, this organization does not possess the power to take any step against the wrongful actions of these super powers. It is such a deficiency of this organization which negates all the positive sides of it (it is not too difficult to comprehend this in the context of the crisis in Palestine). Consequently the western countries under the leadership of the US and the eastern European states under the leadership of the then Soviet Union managed to assert their influence over all the activities of this world organization and the weak third world countries, especially the security of the Muslim countries became vulnerable. With the help of the veto powers conflicts have been kept alive; illegal occupations have been allowed in many parts of the globe and particularly in the regions inhabited by the Muslims. Later on, though Soviet Union has been replaced by Russia but the situation has not changed a bit. Because of its very nature the UN is completely unable to resist the illegal activities of the five super powers and the invasion of Iraq is the latest evidence of that. Under various pretexts the UN orchestrates many different forms of punishments and imposes embargoes against economically and militarily weak third world countries and all that with a background of its failure to make any meaningful stand against the aggressions, domination and inhuman activities of the five super powers. There is no justice against the wrongful activities and injustices of the super powers and their stooges yet this organization is unfailingly firm against other states; it is practically a crime. Through its discriminatory charter the UN has legalized the unlawful dominance and the wrongful acts of the super powers. This organization secures the security and interests of the super powers by undermining the interests of the weak nations. The activities of the IAEA are the classic example of that unscrupulous conduct of the UN. Though the NPT is being imposed upon the non-nuclear states in the name of peace but the real purpose is anything but peaceful. There is a good reason to believe that preventing other states from developing nuclear deterrence against the nuclear blackmail of the super powers is the real goal of the IAEA, and NPT is the vehicle which has so far enabled IAEA to achieve its goal. The UN has absolutely no power to compel the super powers to abandon their huge nuclear stockpile but it insists on pressuring the victims of the super powers to renounce nuclear weapons programme, this is a disguised proxy war of the UN, funded and designed by the so-called established nuclear weapon states and directed towards the non-nuclear states. In order to enhance their defence capabilities and safeguard their national interests the five super powers can build and stockpile every possible type of nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional weapon but the weaker nations, particularly Muslim states cannot do the same. A pack of wolves disguised as lambs will determine what kind of weapons the lambs will be allowed to possess; this is the message being conveyed by the UN and its agencies like the IAEA to the lambs of this wicked world.
[font=Times New Roman]
[font=Times New Roman] Sixty years ago ordinary citizens of the third world countries never thought about these issues, but now during the age of internet many do think about it. Consequently this international body has lost its credibility and acceptance. A few months ago Mr. Kofi Anan attempted to retrieve its acceptance at least partially, by speaking against the wrong doings of the US and by emphasizing upon the urgency of reforms of the UN. But the reality is that the credibility and acceptance of this body cannot be sustained indefinitely through deception and hollow speeches. Perhaps the nuclear arsenal of the super powers and their conspiracy will keep this body alive but its legitimacy in the minds of its defenceless victims has already evaporated. The US and its allies understand that and that is the reason behind this drive to change its outfit. The way things are running it is only natural for this body to lose its standing among nations; that is what should happen. Since its birth, the super powers have been using this world body as an effective weapon for imposing their dominance over other nations and particularly over the Muslim World. If the UN loses its acceptance among nations then it will become quite difficult for the western powers to maintain their disguise as the champions of democracy and human rights and at the same time carry on with their business of dominance and exploitation. On one side the thoughts of those western powers for securing their wicked interests, and on the other hand the call to liberate the UN from the evil grip of the super powers is gradually becoming louder every single passing day.
[font=Times New Roman]
[font=Times New Roman] It is under this circumstance a reform of the UN has been proposed. The wishes of Mr. Anan and the world community are being cited as the source of the drive but after viewing some of the draft proposals it has become quite clear that when those draft proposals were made the wishes of the world community received little attention instead the wishes of power hungry and the powerful received undue consideration. In the draft resolution it has been proposed that the number of permanent seats in the Security Council be increased from five to eleven and the number of temporary seats be increased from ten to fourteen. Names of Germany, Japan, Brazil, India, South Africa and Nigeria have been recommended for permanent membership in the Security Council, but it has also been recommended that these new permanent members should not be given veto power. Those who drafted this resolution, to them, economic and political power seemed most important. They did not take into account the ethical side of the issue. This is why names of Germany and Japan, the two countries responsible for two world wars, countries whose history is infamous for brutality, have made it in the draft resolution. On the other hand, name of India, which is known to all its neighbours as the regional bully, has also made it in the draft resolution as a candidate for permanent membership. It is most likely that the names of Brazil, Nigeria and South Africa have been proposed in order to appease the Muslim World and the two respective continents. Though Nigeria has a Muslim majority but the number of Christians is almost equal. As a result the western influence and pressure on Nigeria is irresistible. Perhaps that is why it has been selected as the only Muslim candidate.
[font=Times New Roman]
[font=Times New Roman] Anyway, which countries made it to the list and which countries didn’t, is not important. What is important, is the article of the UN Charter which has allowed permanent membership and the veto power; it is a threat to world peace and stability for it contradicts the principles of democracy, equality and fair-play. Therefore, is there really any need for permanent membership and veto power in the Security Council? The real purpose of the draft resolutions which propose to increase the number permanent and temporary seats in the Security Council, is to divert attention away from any real reform. Moreover, by referring to the so called failed states theory at the instigation of some super powers and some aggressive regional powers, the UN is being advised to intervene in those failed states and for that it is being also said that this body should be thoroughly reorganized to suit that purpose. Since the dominance of the US and other western powers over this body is one hundred percent, therefore, if that happens powers harbouring malice towards the Muslim World like the US, Israel and India will get the opportunity for direct intervention in numerous Muslim states through the UN, and of course that will happen in the name of fighting terrorism and preventing proliferation of the, so called weapons of mass destruction(when in the hands of the US and its allies these weapons of mass destruction or WMD transform into weapons of peace and the UN and its IAEA have been trying to convey that message to the world for a while now). When there is this urgent need for a meaningful reform of the UN it is indeed most unfortunate that such dangerous and deceitful proposals are being proposed.
[font=Times New Roman]
[font=Times New Roman] The absence of just principles which exists in the UN, filling up that gap will be the best reform and for that, first of all, the discriminatory and unjust articles of the UN charter must be abolished. The stipulation for permanent membership in the Security Council is immoral as it contradicts the principles of equality and fair play; it perpetuates discrimination among sovereign nations. The veto power of the permanent members of the Security Council is completely unlawful as it grossly contradicts just principles and the rule of just law(when laws are unfairly in favour of a group that becomes unjust law and that is what we have in the UN charter). Through this article of the UN charter the permanent members of the Security Council have been given a place above the law. In other words, these privileged members enjoy utter impunity, they are not accountable to the world community for their wrong doings. This is the perfect recipe for aggressions and injustices in massive scale and we have seen plenty of that. Besides, the article in the UN charter which makes the General Assembly subordinate to the Security Council is also unethical as it contradicts the principles of democracy. By this article the will of the majority has been dishonoured. So, the Security Council must be made subordinate to the will of the majority in the General Assembly and I would like to remind the so-called champions of democracy that this is what democracy demands, as far as the reform of the UN is concerned. If there is any question of UN’s acceptance, not to the dominant aggressive forces but to the world community as a whole, then these steps must be considered. The UN must tread a just path and avoid deceit and high sounding but empty slogans. It is only then, this body will regain its credibility, acceptance and above all, the legitimacy of its existence, in the eyes of the world conscience. Or else, the extinction of this body in the minds of billions cannot be prevented, even after contriving bountiful of conspiracies to keep it alive.
[font=Times New Roman]
[font=Times New Roman] Many argue against the possible reforms which I’ve stated by saying that the permanent members of the Security Council would never allow this kind of reform to take place, so we should come up with reform plans which the possessor of veto powers would accept. I say, it is a shrewd attempt to protect the interests of the possessors of the veto power. It is only natural that the bullies who possess immoral authority would want to preserve their illegitimate dominance but advising others to accept that is indeed a grave offence. The holders of veto powers must be made to accept meaningful reforms of the UN and it is not at all impossible as many would like to argue that it is an impossible task. Before embarking on a journey to accomplish that so-called impossible task, there has to be a consensus among the third world nations and the OIC states. They have to be resolute about the reform and must pledge for the implementation of the reforms. If the need arises they must be ready to withdraw their membership from the UN simultaneously. Even, if only half of the UN members join the movement, the monarchs of the Security Council will be forced to accept the proposed reforms for the sake of its existence.