World>Terrorism & Security
posted September 16, 2005 at 11:00 a.m.

US having a hard time finding allies for UN reform

In new geopolitical world, countries help you one minute, hinder you the next.

By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

After a week when most of the reforms it wanted to see initiated at the United Nations were stymied or watered down, The Sunday Times of London reports that the United States wants to " come out blazing" on Monday and push for change. But it faces a new geopolitical world as it attempts to do this, according to a New York Times analysis; one where countries will ally with you on one issue, while at the same time strongly opposing you on other issues.

What Bush faced from the well of the United Nations on Wednesday morning was a strange new geopolitical world, in which your allies on one issue are ganging up on you in the next room. When Bush started coalition-building after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, he expected the United States to be the linchpin. But now, post-Iraq, the president is increasingly facing what might be called coalitions of the unwilling, pursuing their own interests or pushing back US goals around the world, issue by issue.


09/15/05 Israel's high court says govn't must reroute section of fence 09/14/05 Pentagon draft plan calls for preemptive use of nukes 09/13/05 N. Korea, Iran both say they will continue their nuclear efforts

Sign up to be notified daily: Find out more. Subscribe via RSS: What is this?

Some of the new geopolitical partnerships that have stood in the way of US goals include India, China and Pakistan on the issue of referring Iran and its nuclear program to the UN Security Council; South Korea and China working together against the US and Japan on North Korea; and Russia and Europe on three key US issues - the Middle East, the war in Iraq, and global warming.

Meanwhile, many UN delegates said the US has not one to blame but itself for the lack of UN reform. The The Sunday Times reports that many blame US Ambassador John Bolton for demanding more than 400 changes to the reform plan at the last second, a demand that threw the whole process into question. And The Observer reports that senior diplomats say it was the US who "deliberately" derailed an attempt to craft an agreement to prevent terrorists from obtaining "weapons of mass destruction."

Officials involved in the negotiations have confirmed that the Bush administration's refusal to countenance any form of disarmament blocked attempts to push measures that would prevent regimes seeking to develop a nuclear capability. It contradicts reports last week that the US had in fact been furious that plans to crack down on nuclear proliferation were stripped out of the final UN document.
However, diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity have revealed it was in fact President Bush who scuppered what the UN believed was a crucial move in helping make the world safer from the risk of terrorists obtaining a nuclear threat.

Mr. Bolton, meanwhile, says he is ready to "make himself unpopular" in order to push some of the reform goals that the US would like to see in place. Of particular concern to the Americans is the UN Commission on Human Rights. United Press International reports that President Bush would like to see the commission disbanded and replaced with a smaller body "in which only countries with a good human rights record would be eligible for membership." The US is furious that countries with abusive human rights records could sit on the human rights commission and block condemnation of their actions. The New York Times reports that Bolton, despite charges that he helped undo the reform process, has won some respect for his knowledge, diligence, and negotiations during his short time at the UN.

"People were very cautious, to say the least, because of his reputation as a tough guy who didn't like the UN" said Abdallah Baali, the ambassador of Algeria, who said he knew Bolton from working with him in Africa. "In fact, I was the only one who said that Bolton was an intelligent man who could be creative and constructive and wouldn't go around bullying delegations."

But even while admiring his abilities, observers say that his focus on "what the United States would never accept" has "encouraged more active opposition to US positions."

John Ruggie, a professor of international relations at Harvard and a former undersecretary general for planning, said he thought Bolton's approach had emboldened opponents of American priorities, like reforming the UN management structure to give more power and flexibility to the secretary-general.
"After Bolton's bombshell [the last minute request for 400 changes], they were able to make the case that this is why we have to stand firm, because if we give great discretionary authority to the secretary-general, there is a danger that the Americans will roll over him, and behind him always stands the Congress willing to withhold funding," he said.

The US will get to see this week if it can still form the needed coalitions to push through its agenda, as the International Atomic Engergy Agency (IAEA) takes up the issue of Iran's nuclear program. Reuters reports that the US and Europe, who are working together on the Iranian issue, face " fierce resistance," with more than half a dozen of the 35 countries that make up the IAEA's board saying that "there is no cause for a referral" of Iran to the UN Security Council."

Sunday Iran's president declared at the UN that nuclear power was an "inalienable right" for Iran and accused the West of practicing "nuclear apartheid" by depriving it of nuclear know-how."