New Direction for the UN

wu-tang beez · Jun 25, 2003

To Intervene or Not to Intervene: Potential Roles for the UN Security Council in Managing Future Conflicts www.usip.org
Have the contentious debates over Iraq over the past six months at the United Nations permanently damaged its effectiveness or relations with the United States? According to UN scholar Edward Luck, the U.S.-UN relationship throughout history has gone through numerous rocky periods and has yet to be completely "written-off" by U.S. policymakers. Although Luck noted that recent polling figures show that confidence in the United Nations by the American public was at perhaps an all-time low, he expressed optimism that this was not a permanent shift in American public opinion.
Building off Williamson's previous comments, Luck stated that he also felt that reform was needed to make the United Nations, and in particular the UN Security Council, more effective. In particular, Luck suggested that four issues be examined:
1. Tools - Recent Security Council debates have demonstrated that many member states are increasingly uncomfortable about using any tools of coercion provided by the UN charter. This has created a political culture where members now view the United Nations as a forum for discussion and negotiation and not enforcement.
2. Power - As showcased in the recent debate over Iraq, a division has developed within the Security Council over whether the council should seek to harness U.S. economic and military power in international security matters or seek to constrain it.
3. Purpose - Recent actions by the United States and others members of the council in places such as Iraq and Kosovo have raised the question of what the council's function is. Should the Security Council simply endorse or acknowledge when the use of force is appropriate or take a more active role in managing international armed interventions?
4. Legitimacy - As also seen in the recent international controversy over the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq, the importance of the UN's "blessing" of actions taken by member states is perceived very differently in the United States than in many other nations. Is international consensus at the United Nations always needed to make actions by member states legitimate?
Finally, Luck stressed that finding answers to the above questions would not be easy and that any reform initiatives undertaken at the United Nations will be difficult. However, he also emphasized that the United Nations has been a very useful tool for U.S. policymakers in the past and that U.S. relations with the United Nations should not be treated as a zero-sum game.
Click to expand...