Selim Yenel
When the Second World War ended eighty years ago, the United States established an order supported by several multilateral organizations. That scaffolding was not only to prevent another world calamity but also to forge a system that would perpetuate its preponderance. That system continued unevenly until the end of the Cold War, when the Soviet Union collapsed.
Afterwards, the system survived, albeit not in the manner that the United States had envisioned. As membership increased in the United Nations and its associated institutions such as the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the World Trade Organization, the influence of the United States began to wane. In fact, the cracks in the system had started even before the Cold War ended, as the United States left organizations such as UNESCO under President Ronald Reagan because they were seen as acting against the administration’s policies.
A shared system of global governance is only possible if members of an organization take collective ownership, abide by its rules, and implement its decisions. Yet, as another UN General Assembly (UNGA) session begins in September, we witness a weakened institution. The UN system has been sidelined in today’s geopolitical landscape, and decades of efforts to overhaul the UN Security Council have yielded no results. It is thus necessary to make a distinction between what has worked so far and what has not. Prior to the League of Nations, organizations such as the International Telegraph Union, the Universal Postal Union, and others that dealt with maritime, agriculture, science, health, or labor issues were established. Most of the organizations have been incorporated into the UN system and are still operational. Those institutions that have survived did so due to shared interests on matters that cannot be handled alone.
Today, certain matters such as artificial intelligence require collaborative efforts, even as an increasing number of countries, including the big powers, disregard rules or decisions that they disagree with. Moreover, the UN system has not managed politically sensitive questions that have bedeviled regions for decades because votes in the Security Council can be blocked by one member’s veto. We cannot expect much change as long as we live in the current era where might is the chosen method for policymaking.
No comments:
Post a Comment