"The United Nations was not created to bring us to heaven, but in order to save us from hell."
Dag Hammarskjöld
UN Secretary-General (1953-1961)
Without enthusiasts, dreamers and visionaries, history would be a very poor record of routine exercises and results. Progress lies in the hands of those who never stop thinking, of those who seize opportunities in time of crisis, who believe in impossible missions, and who are always progressive and looking forward.
The United Nations is lucky enough to have such people in its orbit, such as Terje Rød-Larsen, President of the International Peace Institute and Kevin Rudd, Chair of the Independent Commission on Multilateralism. Together they launched the ICM's report "UN 2030: Rebuilding Order in a Fragmenting World." This is true groundwork that deserves full attention of UN Member States, their capitals, and the UN Secretariat's international civil service. The UN Secretary-General should embrace this extremely valuable work and implement its insights wherever possible.
I have read carefully the ICM's report, finding a high degree of similarity with my views and ideas shared with the UN Security Council, the General Assembly, and multiple stakeholders. My recent book "Globalization and Diplomacy: In Search of a Better World" lays these out.
The world is at a critical juncture, either subject to growing conflict or willing to give itself the capacity to enable peace, security, development, and human rights. The latter requires countries to have at their disposal strong mechanisms to discuss, decide, and approve actions for a better world. The next Secretary-General of the United Nations will serve for five years, five years that are crucial for realizing that there is no alternative to multilateralism with the United Nations at its core. I stand ready to render all my skills, experience, and energy to the service of this noble cause.
The ICM Report comes at a critical and relevant time, especially because it touches upon questions and dilemmas that few wish to address. It specifically begins with the quintessential question of whether the UN still matters, proceeding in a linear manner and addressing its weakest aspects. It finally attempts a prognosis on the United Nations today: Does the United Nations as a major multilateral mechanism have a future?
The conclusion is very articulate and corresponds fully with the UN's state of affairs by simply asking: "Are the decision-making bodies of the UN multilateral system capable of making the decisions necessary to deal with the systemic challenges of our age?" My answer is that it is the imperative to make the UN "fit for purpose" in order to secure its future as the platform for multilateral action in our developing world.
This very provocative way of defining the status of the UN should not serve as a trigger for endless debates of lamenting its "fatal destiny." Rather, it should encourage all of us believers in multilateralism to roll-up our sleeves, re-imagine the UN Organization against today's challenges, and start working to manage and task it with the capacity to deliver results.
It would be easier to relegate an exhausted UN Organization to the museums of history, but that is not an option as far as I am concerned. All those who have worked against the specter of world war yet again in our future should join forces to strengthen the UN's spirit and its organization rather than idly witness its dissolution.
Finally, it is illusory to imagine a flawless UN organization. Nevertheless, as such we desperately need it to manage the flaws of humanity. In order for that to happen we must accept the fact that perfection does not guarantee peace and happiness, if ever to be reached. Rather, an effective UN would provide capacity for states acting together to resolve turmoil quickly and efficiently wherever it arises.