Page 2871 - 1970S

--~--~----~--~--------~~----~-----~~
serving propaganda, lor attracting pub–
llcity, and lor verbally attacklng and em–
barrassing one' s adversarias.
The highly publlclzed appearances
dlfring the past year ol Yasir Aralat, chlel
ol the terrorist .Palestlnlan liberatlon Or–
ganlzation and a self-admitted murderer
ot women and children, and ol Uganda's
erratic, Hitler-admlrlng President ldl Amln
(labelled a "raclst murderer" by U.S. Am–
bassador Moynlhan) have been wldely
cited as examples ol the abuse or thEr
General Assembly.
The reason for the l ncreasiRgly dlsmal
record of the Genera) Assembly is easily
understood. lt is an axlom ot international
relations that natlons do not generally
bring to the U.N. forum disputes whlch
they teel they can mutually solve. Such
disputes are solved bllaterally or through
a more regional forum such as NATO, the
eec. or the OAS.
11 the invoiVed natlons, on the other
hand, are totalty and lrréllocably bent on
war, the U.N. ls again generálly Ignorad.
"The West's baslc misconceptlon," ob–
serves vetaran polltlcal observar Otto von
Habsburg, .r'is the ballet that this organi–
zatlon ls.¡m lnstrument for the preser":a–
tlon ot peace. Everybody should have
understood that lf two countries are de–
terminad io flght each other, all the ln–
cantations of the lnternational authorltles
cannot change thelr course of action."
What,.disputes, then, find their way lnto
the GenE~al Assembly? In the maln, they
are thos.e whlch show little promlse ot
lmmediate bilateral resolution and ovar
whlch the lnvolved parties are not ready
,or wllling to go to war. Since.the U.N. has ·
no real power to impose a :;ettlement, lt
merely provldes oné or both partías to the
dispute a marvelous opportunity to
present its cause to the wortd.
A showdown vote may be callad In the
Assembly, forclng member natlons to
choose up' sides In a confrontation which
does not directly concern them or to dis–
play solidarity with their particular votlng
bloc when they may not totaUy agree with
the particular resolutlon.
• The result: hollow resolutlons whlch
solve nothing, empty victorias by votes.
Mo·reover, thls sltuation actually pro–
motes the forrnatlon ot new blocs and
factions which work against cooperation
and effectiVe problem solving in the wor1d
body.
" So, if the lssues nations want to settle
cooperatively are kept out of the U.N.,''
summarizes Paul Weaver In a recent ls–
sue of Fortune magázine, "and lf the ls–
sues they have no hope or lntention ot
settling cooperatlvely are ,the ones they
take to the U.N., then the presence of the
U.N. on the world scene tends to perpetu–
{lte conflict." ··
Needed- Reform
In all falrness. lt must be notad that
many ot the substantive accompllsh–
ments of the U.N. take place díscreetly on
the sldelines ol the General Assembly -
In the Delegates' Lounge, In the popular
lndonesian Lounge, In corridors, at the
bar, in the Oelegates' Dlning Room, and,
, sometimes, even Ir\ the rñen's room.
\Face-to-tace talk In these locatlons has
lotten quietly accomplished much Impor–
tan! diplomatic business which would
have ~n much more difficult - or even
impossible - In the more public, three–
rlng-circus atrnosphere of the General
Assembty. -
In September, lor example, a break–
through In the stymled talks on devel-
WEEK ENDINO DECEMBER 6, 1975
opment and economic cooperatlon was
achiéved by the chief U.S. negotllitor and
a leading Thlrd World spokesman In the
U.N. cafeterla.
In addit lon, lt must be remembered that
despite warnlngs of the General Assem–
bly's "threat" to the Uníted States, any
real power the U.N. can exert lles - as ít
a.lways has - In the Security Council,
where the U.S. can at any time exerclse
its veto prerogatlve.
This, however, by no means obvlates
the need for meaningful reform In the
General Assembly. Says a recent article
in the London Times: "In its thlrty-year
history, the U.N. has never appeared less
equipped to meet the challenges of a
fraglle world thán ít does today, 1111d has
never stood more In need ol relorm."
One Vote, One Mess
One major area singlad out - by the
Unlted States, at least - as needlul ol
changa ts the •method· ot voting In the
General Assembly. Over one hall ol the
U.N.'s 142 member nations have fewer
people than New York Cityl Yet each na–
t ion has lully one vote- no more, no less
· - In the Assembly. The Maldlve lslahds
(pop. 115,000), In other words, carry as
much weight In the Assembly as does the
United StateS'or Britaln.
Fortune's analysis ol the U.N. notes
that under the present one nation, one
vote configuration, "the natlons that are
dominan! In the world - by wealth,
power, even populatlon - are a tlny mi–
nority, and the natlons that are weak and
unimportant are in a position of unassaU–
able' superlority." Theoreílcally, the
analysis adds. ít would be posslble "to
assemble amajor1ty in the General As–
sembly that. would represen! as llttle as
4.7% ol the world's populatlon, 1.3% of
gross world product, and an even smaller
fraction ol the world's military power."
Vot ing reform. however, would entail
substantive changas in the U.N. charter,
which would prove a nearly lmpossible
task. The organizatlon' s smaller members
are not golng to willingly rellnquish thelr
present votlng advantages In lavo/, for
example, of welght ing votes by popu–
lation.
Beyond any possible structural and
procedural relorms, the United States it–
selt, it has been suggested, can do much
to straighten out the General Assembly.
Ambassador Moynihan' s "get tough
and speak out" pollcy is wldely hallad as
a step In the rlght dlrection. " lt's time lor
the United States to go lnto the Unlted
Nations ... and start raising hell," Moyni–
han said In an lnterview ear11er thls year.
He added that he is opposed to a U.S.
wlthdrawaf lrom the U.N.. insistlng that
the world body can be·made to work 11 the
U.S. displays a new spirit of lnitíative and
vigorous leadershlp.
American economic retallatlon - wlth–
holding ald, lor example - agalnst na–
tions partlcl patlng in lrresponsl ble
General Assembly actions, comblned
with skillful maneuvering to break up bloc
votlng by playing nations one agalnst an–
other, could go lar toward settlng the As–
sembly back on the right track.
Otherwlse, continuad reckless actions
on the part of various blocs a.nd lnterésts
in the U.N. could wreck the organlzation
altogether - and despite all its llmitations
and drawbecks, this is viewed as undesir–
able even to most of its critics.
St1,0uld the Arab and allled blocs, for
example, succeed in denylng Israel the
right to partlclpate in the General Assem-
bly, the U.S. would retaliate, al mlnimum,
by severely slashing its appropriations to
the U.N. And as its single largest contrib–
utor, even a token reductlon ol U.S. pay–
ménts would cause hardshlp In the
organlzatlon.
Furthermore, should the U.S. - whose
support, In thewords of Henry Klssinger,
is " the lifeblood of the organlzation" -
ever be drlven )o completely sever líes to
the world body, it could no longar even
hold lorth the pretensa of belng a viable
organlzatlon ol any real worth.
Beatlng Sworda
lnt.o Plowshares
The original framers of the U.N. c"harter
had a noble aspTration. A mechanism lor
internatlonal discussion and cooperation
on problems ol global slgnltlcance is 1
even more essentlal today .than 1t was
three decades ago. " Worldwlde organi–
zatlon," observed President Ford on the
occasion ol the U.N.'s 30th anniversary,
" is necessary to deal wíth world~ide
problema."
U.N. Secretary General Kurt.~aldJlaim
also· notad that the "proble"ri\'~:\tacing
manklr¡d are, In the maln, problems com–
mon to all nations and reglons, and it is
not posslble to resolve them anymore by
purely national, or even regional, re–
sponses."
But In a wor1d ol sovereign and diversa
nations. the U.N. is simply limitad in what
it can do. lt is doing just about all that i ts
soverelgn members wlll, at present, al/ow
lt todo. · '
The U.N. ís nota world,government –
not even the embryo ol one. 1t is slmply
an assoclation of soverelgn states - an
lnstrument of lnternational diplomacy
with many limitations and shortcomings.
Only when nations, In a spirit ol mutual
understanding, .abandon their selflsh
alms and petty quarrels and learn to co–
operate tor ihe good ot aH, wlll a truly
effectlve world government be posslble.
lnscribed on a marble wall at the U.N.
headquarters in New York Ci ty ls a por–
tian'of the ancient prophecy ol lsaiati 2:4,
symbolizing the ultlmate goal of the U.N.:
"They shall beat their swords lnto
.plowshares,, and their spears into prun–
lnghool<s: natlon 'shall not fift up sword
_agalnst nation, neither shali they learn
war anymore."
The first portion ol thls prophecy - not
quoted on the marble wall - provides the
answer to how worldwíde peace and
prosperity will ultlmately be achieved:
"And he [God) shall judge among the
natlons. and shall rebuke many
people... :· .
The wor1d will soon sea the realization
ol lts centuries-old dream of perrnanent
peace - but not through the eflorts ol
man. O
9