It is not difficult to find detractors or critics of the United Nations. Israel's former foreign minister, Abba Eban, famously compared the U.N. to an umbrella that folds as soon as it begins to rain. In bitter frustration, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, former U.S. representative to the U.N., called the organization's General Assembly a "theater of the absurd." Critics, therefore, contend that it is not surprising that at times in the fight against ethnic cleansing in the Balkans or in the war against terrorism, the U.N. has been bypassed or ignored.
There is, however, an alternate view. On Feb. 20 Cornellians packed a lecture room in McGraw Hall to hear one of the organization's most articulate defenders -- Ambassador Paul Heinbecker, Canada's permanent representative to the U.N., who delivered a lecture titled "You Need the U.N. and the U.N. Needs You." A distinguished Canadian career diplomat, between 1989 and 1992, Heinbecker served as the then-prime minister's chief foreign policy adviser. He was on campus at the invitation of the Canadians at Cornell Club, with the support of the Student Activity Finance Commission, the Einaudi Center for International Studies and the Department of Government.
Heinbecker first addressed some of the common misconceptions about the U.N. He pointed out the pivotal differences between sovereign states and the U.N., a universalistic international organization. Though the U.N. generates seminal ideas, it is counterproductive, he suggested, to have unrealistic expectations and to place unreasonable demands on the U.N.
He emphasized the need for the organization to find the right balance between respecting the rights of sovereignty and the impetus to intervene to protect a variety of human rights or to end the gross violation of such rights. The U.N., he pointed out, has sent missions or has sought to address problems in many places, including Kosovo, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan. Everywhere, though, it has faced a series of dilemmas.
Heinbecker also noted that the U.N., at times, fell considerably short of its goals. For instance, he was quite critical of the controversial U.N.-sponsored "World Conference Against Racism" last fall in Durban, South Africa, which he felt had been "hijacked." But he also conveyed most effectively the enormous potential and the very real achievements of the U.N. Though a good deal of the work of the organization seems mundane, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, he asserted, epitomizes the indispensability of the U.N. to the protection of human rights. Further, he contended that the U.N.'s ability to deal with the issues of poverty on a global level represents one of the other vital dimensions of the organization.
In addition, Heinbecker argued, the multilateral capacity of the U.N. is both unmatched and central. There are seminal problems, he suggested, that a state cannot effectively address unilaterally. Specifically, he referred to the goal of eliminating terrorism. The best strategy, he said, was to "drain the swamp" and this would include depriving the terrorists of economic support. A single state cannot unilaterally freeze their international economic support system. Only the U.N., he declared, could take the effective multilateral measures.
There is no doubt therefore of the organization's relevance and importance, Heinbecker argued. Equally, countries need to support the U.N. to make it effective, he said.
| Cornell Chronicle Front Page | | Table of Contents | | Cornell News Service Home Page |