This is the old United Nations University website. Visit the new site at http://unu.edu

The UNU-Public Forum on Maintaining Peace through the United Nations in the Twenty-first Century was held at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on 15 June 1998. The UNU Public Forums are a way for the University to disseminate its research findings. This Forum, however, was somewhat different in that it disseminates the outcome of a project of the Research Commissions of the International Peace Research Association (IPRA) published by the United Nations University Press. In fact, the Forum also served as a book launching for The Future of the United Nations System: Potential for the Twenty-first Century, a volume which focuses on insights from peace research which suggest that planning for peace requires attention not only to factors that produce "negative peace" but also those that contribute to "positive peace."

The panel discussion was moderated by Mr. Jacques Fomerand, Director of the United Nations University Office at the United Nations, in New York (UNUONA). There were two guest speakers: the editor of The Future of the United Nations System: Potential for the Twenty-first Century, Professor Chadwick F. Alger, Mershon Professor of Political Science and Public Policy Emeritus at Ohio University; and Professor Ho-Won Jeong, the author of the chapter in the volume titled The Struggle In the UN System for Wider Participation in Forming Global Economic Policies from the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University. Two panelists also participated in the discussion: Ambassador Samuel Insanally of the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Guyana to the United Nations and former President of the United Nations General Assembly; and Mr. Alvaro de Soto, Assistant Secretary-General, Department of Political Affairs at the United Nations.

Some 200 persons registered or inquired about the Public Forum. Actual attendance was in the vicinity of 100 persons including, Ambassadors and representatives of permanent missions to the United Nations, Senior Officials and members of the UN Secretariat, UN agencies and programmes, academic institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Prevention of Violence and Disruptive Conflict through Peace Keeping and Peace Building in the United Nations

Professor Chadwick Alger began his presentation by observing that there are many definitions of peace and that people’s definitions of peace depend on the kind of pain and suffering – the kind of peacelessness – that they are experiencing in their daily lives. As such, world peace can only be attained by cooperation in an effort to maximize all of these different definitions of peace, not by merely adopting one state’s or one group of states’ definitions.

Twenty-two scholars from around the world contributed to the twelve chapters of The Future of the United Nations System: Potential for the Twenty-first Century in nine research commissions of the International Peace Research Association. These scholars, in twelve "laboratories," were asked to analyze past and present practices, and to search out potentials for the future. Furthermore, each author was urged to satisfy four main criteria. The main goal of each chapter is to illuminate future opportunities for the UN system. Each chapter also aims to take a UN-system view because of the belief that peace requires contributions from the entire system. In addition, each chapter is placed in historical context, reaching back to the experiences of the League of Nations where feasible, as this makes it possible to realize how much has already been achieved and how rising expectations sometimes prevent us from fully realizing these accomplishments as we aspire to reach even higher goals. Finally, each author was asked to discuss ways in which the UN can collaborate with NGOs and civil society. The goal of this exercise was to identify a diversity of opportunities where potential could be developed to take advantage of the possibilities that the current world system offers. In essence, the contributors to the volume searched for tasks for a wide variety of actors in emerging global governance: members of secretariats, representatives of member states, NGOs and social movements, provincial and city governments, and universities.

The volume is divided into four sections: overcoming and preventing violence; peace-building (creating economic and social structures that sustain human fulfillment); sharing and protecting the commons (the oceans, space etc.); and developing the foundations (peace education). The scholars who contributed to these four sections produced over sixty-five recommendations for new instruments and programs on a variety of issues. Professor Alger presented a few examples of these proposals focusing on four themes: 1) strengthening UN response capacity; 2) finding ways to employ rewards; 3) enhancing learning capacity; and 4) publicizing successes.

Various scholars have suggested that the UN must become more able to take preventive action that focuses on the root causes of extreme conflict and violence and that opens up earlier avenues for non-military action. Professor Alger discussed a few of the proposals generated to enhance response capacity. One approach recommends that the United Nations increase its ability to monitor world events through technological devices and human eyes and ears. For example, roving ambassadors appointed by the Secretary General should meet with those involved in festering conflicts. In addition, an international monitoring agency should be instituted to employ satellites and high-altitude aircraft. The Security Council and Secretary General should also establish a standing conflict resolution committee to discuss all potential conflicts or a UN institute for dispute resolution and mediation. Furthermore, a permanent voluntary UN force that can be called in for immediate, preventative action should be created. The UN system’s various agencies should also become more involved in the area of enhancing response capacity. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), for example, should have field offices investigating gross human rights violations and seeking to understand reasons for refugee flight.

The second type of proposal Professor Alger discussed is finding ways to extend rewards for the fulfillment of UN standards for economic well-being, ecological balance, social justice and non-violence. Economic benefits, for instance, should be offered to states that reduce military expenditures, and the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank should provide financial assistance for military to civilian conversion. The third type of proposal is enhancing learning capacity. Much has been learned through UN practice, but often the lack of institutional memory prevents this learning from being disseminated and put into practice. Also, in some instances there is a need to educate UN staffs in order to move them from competitive national visions to international, global ones. In addition, reciprocal learning between NGOs and the UN secretariat should be encouraged. The fourth type of proposal is extending publicity about the many significant UN achievements that do not get the type of media attention that failures and crises receive – successful peace keeping operations, universally accepted human rights conventions, environmental successes, and accomplishments in the advancement of women (especially within the UN system).

Professor Ho-Won Jeong began his presentation by calling attention to the fact that the issues of human needs are not equally represented in different economic development strategies subscribed to by various UN agencies. While it is imperative to rectify this situation by amending the UN economic decision-making process, the changing relationships between rich and poor countries as well as the internal dynamics of the system provide challenges for reform. In the past, the most prescribed mechanism for dealing with new issues has simply been the creation of new bodies. Meanwhile, an institution for coordinating the UN’s various economic development activities has not been established.

The main UN forum for economic and social development issues, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), has played a largely consultative and advisory role. Meanwhile, the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) most important function has been to enhance coordination within the framework of country programs. Professor Jeong pointed out that in this setting, defining common objectives for all member states has proved to be elusive as a result of differing perceptions, expectations and interests, especially between industrialized and developing countries. Furthermore, the significant power of the Bretton Woods institutions, the marginalization of Third World countries from economic development policy-making and the renewed interest on free market approaches has weakened the role of the UN system in major international economic decision-making.

One of the most important responsibilities of the UN is to ensure that an economic dialogue between rich and poor countries can take place. In addition, the UN system has to undergo a reform process to enhance coordination and to give UN bodies a greater say in international economic decision-making. Several proposals seek to achieve these objectives, mostly by focusing on the need to expand the role of the ECOSOC. One proposition, for example, suggests that the ECOSOC should be transformed into a Council of Ministers supported by a policy-planning staff for development. Another approach calls for the establishment of a high-level international development council whose function may be undertaken by a reformed ECOSOC. A third supports the creation of an Economic Security Council which would operate at a higher level than the current ECOSOC.

Professor Jeong called attention to some principles and issues that need to be addressed in restructuring the UN economic system. The first of these is how the promotion of free market economic strategies and the satisfaction of basic human needs can be reconciled. The second involves the question of whether the ECOSOC should be strengthened and reformed, or whether a regional policy-making framework should be encouraged. A third important issue concerns how relations with the World Bank and the IMF should be pursued. The relations between these Bretton Woods institutions have become rather delicate as their introduction of structural adjustment policies put them at odds with many UN agencies. The fourth issue has to do with the need to involve NGOs more fully in economic policy-making in the UN system. And the fifth concerns decision making structures. Professor Jeong suggested that consensus can be reached more readily in a structure consisting of councils and commissions.

In conclusion, Professor Jeong pointed to the new challenges posed by globalization. In the current world environment, one of the crucial roles of the United Nations should be to organize an international system that would allow the North and South to jointly explore their differences as well as their similarities to be able to develop a common ground. The UN reform process needs to have a vision, and to identify goals and obstacles. Professor Jeong suggested that perhaps the Millennium General Assembly proposed by the Secretary General can broaden the discussion on reform by inviting civil society to play a part. Although this would raise the question of who the civil society is – local, regional or global NGOs – it would also lead to an examination of the new dimensions of the global political process.

Ambassador Insanally began by pointing out that the creation of new states in the post-cold war era has led to the rise of new conflicts in such regions of the world as the Balkans and the former Soviet Union. The world is now challenged not only by inter-state conflicts but also intra-state conflicts, making the task of maintaining peace and security more complex than ever before. Ambassador Insanally thus agreed with the various contributors to The Future of the United Nations System: Potential for the Twenty-first Century that perhaps, the time has come to take collective action. He also surmised, however, that this may be a utopian view as major countries are unlikely to take steps that they view as giving up their sovereignty. A system of collective security would ensure big and small states that their security needs would be satisfied by an impartial organization. Consequently, it is necessary to research both the failures and the successes in previous attempts at collective security to produce feasible options for the future.

Ambassador Insanally also called attention to some other areas of the UN system that require reform, such as the Security Council, which had not been mentioned by the speakers. The Security Council has to be made more responsive to the needs of the entire world and more representative of the current world system. A greater balance between industrialized and developing countries would enable the Council to deal more effectively with current world issues.

While commending the panel of the Public Forum for striking a balance between the political and economic spheres, Ambassador Insanally called attention to the fact that only one chapter of the volume deals with economic development. Development and peace, however, cannot be separated from one another. He also praised the volume’s comprehensive treatment of the other pillars of peace – education, stability in such issues as the environment, drug trafficking, healthcare etc. Ambassador Insanally also pointed out that more attention could have been paid to the important role regional arrangements play in supplementing the United Nations. Reiterating the sentiments of one contributor, Betty Reardon, he pointed out that reform has to be carried out with a sense of vision. We must know, in other words, where we are coming from and where we want to go. We must envision what type of organization we want the United Nations to be so we can work towards building it.

According to Ambassador Insanally, one issue that the volume deals with rather tangentially is the financial issue which is at the crux of many of the problems the UN system is facing. Until and unless the financial problems are solved, it will be difficult to implement reforms to improve the organization. New forms of financing the UN on a stable basis have to be generated to make it possible for the other ideas to come to fruition.

Following Ambassador Insanally, Mr. Alvaro de Soto began his presentation by calling attention to the goals of the United Nations at the time of its inception – to prevent the scourge of war from befalling the children of those who drafted the Charter of the organization. The creators of the UN did not conceive an integrated organization but rather one that worked as a functional system in which different bodies operated within their own governing arrangements. Furthermore, they did not install a chief executive who is in a position to ultimately rule on what should be done.

The end of the cold war, and the problems that have accompanied the shift in the structure of the international system, have made the UN system’s structural flaws more acute. There are new problems that defy the capacity of the UN system. Furthermore, post-conflict peace building (preventing the breaking out or the recurrence of a war) has become more important than ever before, especially in regions where there are internal conflicts.

Mr. de Soto also pointed out that most of the conflict in the world today exists within states. Not only do these internal conflicts tend to be more violent but their consequences seem to be deeper. In addition, finding solutions to such conflicts seem to be more challenging. We can no longer be satisfied with cease-fires, for example, that depend on merely separating the combatants. Rather, we need to have mechanisms to prevent the future recurrence of these conflicts and the UN system needs to work together to find solutions to such complex disputes. These new issues bolster the need for works like The Future of the United Nations System: Potential for the Twenty-first Century as it is now more essential than ever for scholars working in research "laboratories" to come up with new and innovative ideas.

While Mr. de Soto stated that many of the ideas contained in the volume are appropriate and viable, he responded to some of the proposals outlined by Professor Alger. He maintained that it is often difficult for the UN to bring non-state actors into UN discussions because, above all, it is an organization of member states. The notion of having roving ambassadors is not one that is likely to be embraced by member states who are always wary of accepting institutions they perceive to be supranational and infringing on their sovereignty. There is also likely to be strenuous resistance to the idea of the UN engaging in satellite monitoring, especially by countries who already have this technology. Furthermore, when first proposed, the idea of a permanent, volunteer rapid deployment force was opposed by most member states who were adverse to the idea of the UN being able to take autonomous action in deploying such forces.

Following the panel discussion, the floor was opened to audience questions and comments. The first comment was from an audience member who expressed concern that the private sector, which has an increasingly significant impact on conflicts around the world, was not discussed by the panel or by the contributors. Professor Alger responded that although the international business actors are very important, it is impossible for a volume such as this to cover every topic in detail. Ambassador Insanally reiterated the sentiment that the private sector is an indispensable part of the equation and although multi-national corporations (MNCs) were long thought of as a part of the problem, it is now being realized that they can contribute to peace making and peace building. In fact, MNCs are among the primary beneficiaries of the UN’s successes in bringing about stability to the countries in which these corporations operate. As such, they should be more supportive of the organization.

Ambassador Insanally also commended the way in which the United Nations University has succeeded in opening up previously sensitive subjects, such as the membership of the Security Council, to public discourse. He asserted that the UN benefits significantly from dialogue with NGOs and from studies, such as The Future of the United Nations System: Potential for the Twenty-first Century conducted by academics in institutions like the UNU that contribute to the discussions about UN reform.

Another audience member commented that the UN system rarely looks at physical environmental threats to security and asked whether this issue is examined in the volume. Professor Alger replied that the chapter in the volume on the environment, Ecological Security and the United Nations System by Patricia M. Mische and Mauricio Andres Ribero, is in fact very strong and covers this issue rather comprehensively.

The third comment recognized the urgency for additional collaboration between civil society and the UN Secretariat. The question was asked whether the IPRA, or UNU have plans to assess the recommendations made in the volume to see whether further collaboration is possible. Professor Alger expressed a willingness to take part in further discussion of these recommendations.

Mr. Fomerand called attention to a five year UNU research project titled The United Nations in the Twenty-first Century: Potential for the Twenty-first Century which contains a significant segment on the role of civil society. Each year, one topic is the focus of a research theme. The role of civil society was a topic addressed two years ago and will be revisited within the next two years, in the concluding part of the research project in relation to questions of governance. The subject of civil society was also touched upon in another related project completed about five years ago which dealt with Multilateralism and the United Nations System (MUNS). The UNU continues to identify related areas of interest and publish such academic work as The United Nations System: The Policies of Member States edited by Alger; State, Society and the UN System: Changing Perspectives on Multilateralism edited by Krause and Knight; Global Transformation: Challenges to the State System edited by Sakamoto; and Peace and Security in the Asia Pacific Region edited by Clements.