| UN Reform |  |
UN Reform
Mixed Results of the UN Summit on UN Reform
Throughout 2005, the Blue Ridge Virginia Chapter was heavily involved in following the UN reform process which culminated in the UN Summit of more than 150 leaders of the UN's 191 member states in September 2005 in New York. A position statement was prepared by the Chapter's Board prior to the Summit in support of UN reform (see Our Position on UN Reform elsewhere on this web site).
The results of the Summit were mixed. Significant progress toward revitalizing the UN was made at the meeting and groundwork was laid for further progress. However, consensus was not reached on a number of important issues.
On the positive side, the Summit reiterated determination to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. (These goals, together with their associated targets, are listed here: Millenium Development Goals.) In the end, the U.S. supported the goals, but only after an initial attempt by U.S.'s UN Ambassador, John Bolton, to eliminate any mention of the goals in the consensus outcome document. A Peacebuilding Commission was created. While the UN has always been involved in "peacekeeping," "peacebuilding" involves the transition from cessation of hostilities to the development of a stable government. A Human Rights Council was created to replace the discredited Commission on Human Rights, though details of its organization were left to future action by the General Assembly. A Democracy Fund suggested by the U.S. was created for the establishment and strengthening of democracies. A process was initiated for Secretariat management reforms, including the creation of an independent oversight advisory committee and a one-time staff buyout. In a major change, the Summit endorsed the new international policy known as "the responsibility to protect." This policy is a recognition of the "responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity," together with agreement that the UN is prepared "to take collective action on a case-by-case basis."
On the negative side, the Summit made no progress on expanding the Security Council, a primary goal of the Summit. The Summit reached no agreement regarding nonproliferation and disarmament so the issue was completely left out in the final consensus document, an omission that Secretary General Annan called a "disgrace". The impasse resulted in part from the U.S. refusal to budge on its disarmament positions (such as opposition to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, opposition to language calling on nuclear weapons states to continue dismantling arsenals, and U.S. pursuit of new nuclear weapons such as the "bunker busting" nuclear weapon) and in part from some non-nuclear countries' refusal to accept the "Additional Protocol" to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons that was supported by the Secretary General and the U.S. and would provide more thorough processes for nonproliferation inspection. Regarding the new Human Rights Council, the decision to transfer to the General Assembly the responsibility for developing details such as number of members, membership criteria, and term duration left the effectiveness of the Council in doubt. While condemning terrorism, the Summit failed to come up with a consensus definition of terrorism, a failure that makes the goal of the creation of a Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism more difficult. The "Group of 77" (Developing Countries) blocked immediate implementation of important Secretariat management reforms-reforms that the U.S. administration and Congress strongly supported-in order to preserve the General Assembly's control over the UN's budget and major management decisions.