Reforming the U.N.
Kofi Annan delivered a surprise Hanukkah gift to friends of Israel and democracy this week, in the form of a United Nations reform plan that includes, at long last, a clear and usable definition of terrorism. Ruling out “mitigating” circumstances like occupation, the report is said to declare that terrorism against civilians “is never an acceptable tactic, even for the most defensible of causes.” The plan’s adoption would end the long-standing refusal of Arab states and their allies to let the world body outlaw terrorism without exceptions for occupation and resistance, meaning attacks on Israelis.
The terrorism clause is just one of a host of sensible reforms Annan is submitting to the General Assembly for debate and, hopefully, adoption in the coming months. Another goal is to broaden the Security Council, making room for new powers that have emerged in the decades since World War II. Still another is re-examining the sacred principle of sovereignty, giving the Security Council the power to act pre-emptively when it faces a deadly combination of failed states and weapons of mass destruction.
The reforms are sure to get a raspberry from those on the right who see the U.N. as a hopelessly corrupt tool of dictatorships that should be abolished. They’re wrong, of course; the U.N. is no better or worse than the countries that make it up, and those who wish for a different world body are simply wishing they lived on a different planet. The U.N. hasn’t magically created peace, but it has provided a place to talk. Better to fix it than to end it.
It may be no coincidence that Annan’s report comes out the very same week that voices on the right are gearing up to demand his resignation over the Iraq oil-for-food scandal. The scandal consists, in a word, of evidence that Saddam Hussein outwitted the U.N. sanctions regime and enriched himself off food aid intended for his people. There’s a scandal there, no question. Whether it requires Kofi Annan’s head is a separate question. Are these same firebrands demanding the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld over the Abu Ghraib scandal? Or are they, perhaps, simply looking for an opportunity to get in a few shots at the U.N., just when reform seems in reach?
This is a moment of great uncertainty. Here’s what you can do about it.
We hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, we’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s independent Jewish news this Passover. All donations are being matched by the Forward Board - up to $100,000.
This is a moment of great uncertainty for the news media, for the Jewish people, and for our sacred democracy. It is a time of confusion and declining trust in public institutions. An era in which we need humans to report facts, conduct investigations that hold power to account, tell stories that matter and share honest discourse on all that divides us.
With no paywall or subscriptions, the Forward is entirely supported by readers like you. Every dollar you give this Passover is invested in the future of the Forward — and telling the American Jewish story fully and fairly.
The Forward doesn’t rely on funding from institutions like governments or your local Jewish federation. There are thousands of readers like you who give us $18 or $36 or $100 each month or year.
Support our mission to tell the Jewish story fully and fairly.
