United Nations University Public Forum

The United Nations System in the 21st Century

18 December 1995

A UNU Public Forum was held on Monday, 18 December 1995, from 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. at United Nations headquarters in New York. The Forum was organized as an immediate follow-up to the Symposium on The United Nations System in the 21st Century which was held at UNU headquarters in Tokyo during 21-22 November 1995. The purpose of the Forum was to make widely known the outcome of the Tokyo Symposium, including the long-term research and training activities to be undertaken by the University as identified through its deliberations. A related objective was to promote an exchange of views relevant to the research programme among representatives of the diplomatic community, officials of the UN Secretariat, academics, and representatives of non-governmental organization (NGOs) and the media.

The forum was chaired by the Rector of the UNU, Professor Heitor Gurgulino de Souza. Professor Diogo Freitas do Amaral, President of the General Assembly, opened the panel discussion. Other panelists included Ambassadors Hisashi Owada (Japan), Celso Luiz Nunes Amorin (Brazil), and Rene Valery Mongbe (Benin), Mrs. Gertrude Mongella, Secretary-General of the Fourth World Conference on Women, and Dr. Benjamin Rivlin, Director of the Ralph Bunche Institute on the United Nations at the City University of New York.

Professor Freitas do Amaral began the discussion by noting that there is no clear-cut or discernible consensus over what role the United Nations should play, or how much authority the organization ought to exercise in the forthcoming decades. According to Professor Freitas do Amaral, it was rightly observed at the Tokyo Symposium that development no longer seems to be a mobilizing paradigm, and that there is at present a lack of political will on the part of the international community to address the continuing development problems facing third world countries. He suggested that discussion on this matter should focus on, or at least should address, the issue of globalization. If the gap between development needs and financial resources is to be perceived as a global problem, member states will have no choice but to look for global solutions, and global solutions imply global resources and global financing. Within this context, he expressed support for the symposium's recommendation that more theoretical analysis and empirical research be focused on issues relating to the so-called global commons.

Professor Freitas do Amaral called attention to the following question which arose during the Symposium deliberations: Does sovereignty entail not only state's rights but also the obligation to provide for the security and well-being of its citizens? According to Professor Freitas do Amaral, the answer clearly should be yes. In this connection, he suggested that submission to international jurisdiction and effective submission to international law should be left out of any definition parameters of modern state sovereignty. He further stressed that the still existing possibility of refusing the International Court of Justice's jurisdiction is an anachronism left over from the days of unlimited state sovereignty.

Ambassador Owada commended the UNU for launching the research programme on The United Nations System in the 21st Century. In contrasting the UNU's programme with other similar studies recently undertaken on United Nations reform, he called attention to a number of distinct advantages enjoyed by the UNU, including the programme's long-term period of study, and the University's unique position which enables it to combine the study of theoretical approaches with the experiences of those involved in the practice of international organization and the United Nations.

Ambassador Owada suggested that it would be necessary to make distinctions between three basic frameworks during the course of the programme. This first concerns the long-term transformation of the international system -- an evolution that has been in motion since the development of the 17th century Westphalian legal order. The second framework relates to the growing dichotomy of the sovereign nation as a regulatory unit and as the object of regulation. Within this context, Ambassador Owada called attention to the following short-term changes affecting the international scene and the United Nations since the end of World War II: (a) the birth and growth of new nations which tend to emphasize sovereign aspects of their existence rather than interdependence; (b) the growing lack of social homogeneity which can hinder the identification of common values; and (c) changes in the nature of power as a factor in international relations, most notably the decreasing validity of war as a means of diplomacy. The third framework identified by Ambassador Owada concerns the proliferation of problems since the demise of the Cold War and the end of the bi-polar international system.

Ambassador Amorin noted that although it may be true that development is no longer a mobilizing paradigm, it reflects a reality that should not be accepted by the international community. According to Ambassador Amorin, the adoption of the Secretary-General's Agenda for Development should help to prominently place development back onto the United Nations' agenda. In order for this to be accomplished, he stated that it will be necessary to re-assess and reinvent the concept of development. Ambassador Amorin suggested that the UNU ought to consider undertaking this task.

As for the role of NGOs, Ambassador Amorin noted that work of these organizations in the areas of disarmament and security are especially important. He added that NGOs are not mechanisms for making decisions, but tend instead to reflect ideas. Therefore, the role of NGOs should not be stretched too much. Ambassador Amorin concluded his statement by warning against the over-simplification of the roles of regional organizations. In this connection, he noted the importance of stressing the functional relationship between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions.

Mrs. Mongella began her statement by emphasizing the need for the UNU to disseminate its work more widely. In addition to research and training, Mrs. Mongella urged the UNU to focus its efforts on acting as a mechanism to stimulate frank debates between academics and practitioners on pressing issues facing the international community.

Mrs. Mongella observed that each of the World Conferences on Women have dealt with similar themes: development, peace and equality. According to Mrs. Mongella, the recently held Beijing Conference helped to illuminate the importance of the United Nations, especially when dealing with issues that cannot be addressed at the national level.

Expressing agreement with Ambassador Amorin, Mrs. Mongella stressed that there is an urgent need to redefine development. She further added that it is essential to include women as a major factor in the concept of development. In this connection, Mrs. Mongella called upon the UNU to study ways of making the activities of the United Nations the activities of all people. She focused special attention on including women in democratic and decision-making processes.

Dr. Rivlin opened his remarks by observing that the Tokyo Symposium deliberations demonstrated a clear understanding that the United Nations, as a reflection of the precarious condition of world affairs since the relative stability of the Cold War era evaporated, was now in a state of flux and uncertainty. According to Dr. Rivlin, it is patently clear that the United Nations cannot continue with a "business as usual" attitude. Moreover, it is not merely a matter of reforming the existing institutions and practices of the United Nations system, but one of understanding why the United Nations is in so precarious a position and to suggest what may be done to alleviate this situation. Dr. Rivlin described this as the challenge facing the United Nations University as it embarks on its ambitious project of looking ahead to the United Nations in the 21st century. Professor Rivlin added that a major task ahead for the UNU's project is to focus on the causes for the current disenchantment with the United Nations and on their short- and long-term consequences.

Dr. Rivlin commented that the prospects for most states to "return to multilateralism" (a call issued by Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Bruntland) appear unlikely, leaving clear limitations to what inter-governmental organizations can do. Dr. Rivlin concluded his statement by stressing the importance of discerning how the various non-state actors and NGOs can provide another avenue to influence governments to build an effective United Nations.

Ambassador Mongbe's statement called attention to the five working groups in the United Nations General Assembly which address the following issues: (1) An Agenda for Peace; (2) reform of the Security Council; (3) An Agenda for Development; (4) the financial situation of the UN; and (5) the strengthening of the organization. Ambassador Mongbe suggested that the UNU should pursue the research of issue areas that directly corresponds with items currently on the agendas of these working groups. In addition, he recommended that the UNU convene another Public Forum in the coming months for the purposes of assessing the programme's progress and for providing the opportunity for further exchange between practitioners and academics on matters related to United Nations reform. Ambassador Mongbe encouraged the UNU to present the outcome of its work within the framework of a similar Public Forum, so that it could then be analyzed together with the results of the efforts of each working group.

A question-and-answer period lasting approximately one hour followed the panel discussion. The discussion focused on a wide range of issues, including redefining development, the evolving concept of sovereignty, the United Nations' role in the exchange of information, United Nations reform, global public goods, and global citizenship.