Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Jun 15 2005 (IPS) — The United States must take a leadership role in enacting and financing sweeping reforms at the United Nations, but should not threaten the world body with withholding its dues in order to ensure compliance, according to the co-chairmen of a high-level bipartisan task force that released its own recommendations for U.N. reform here Wednesday.

"As an expression of the level of anger many Americans feel (towards the U.N.), (withholding dues) is an understandable approach," said Newt Gingrich about a bill on which the House of Representatives is expected to vote Thursday.

The bill, sponsored by International Relations Committee chairman Henry Hyde, requires that Washington withhold up to 50 percent of its assessed dues if the U.N. does not make 39 specific changes in its structure and operations.

"But as a general rule, you withhold funds as a last option, not as the first," said Gingrich, the former Republican Speaker who co-chaired the Congressionally mandated "Task Force on the United Nations" along with former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell.

Mitchell, a leading Democrat who noted that a number of Hyde’s proposals were included in the Task Force’s recommendations, said he also opposed the bill as written.

"The threat or use of withholding produces a very powerful negative response that will decrease prospects for reform," he said at a press conference to release the task force’s 145-page report.

In addition to endorsing many of Hyde’s demands for organisational reform, particularly in creating new oversight bodies for various U.N. operations, the long-awaited report, "American Interests and U.N. Reform," also calls for far-reaching changes in areas such as budgeting authority, humanitarian intervention, and peacekeeping.

The task force insists, for example, that in cases where the U.N. Security Council is unable or unwilling to take effective action in response to massive human rights abuses or genocide, individual member-states or regional organisations may intervene without the Council’s approval provided the intervention is "demonstrably for humanitarian purposes".

While opposing the establishing of a standing U.N. military force, it also called for the world body to create a rapid-reaction capability among member-states that can identify and deploy against threats of genocide or mass murder before they fully develop.

The task force’s recommendations are likely to be read with unusual attention both here and at the U.N., partly because they come at a moment when the world body is in crisis as a result of its marginalisation in the U.S.-led war in Iraq, the recent Oil-for-Food scandal, and allegations that members of U.N. peacekeeping forces have committed sexual abuse against women and girls.

The recommendations also represent a consensus among representatives of highly influential Washington think tanks spanning the spectrum from the internationalist centre-left to nationalist far right, including several well-known unilateralists, such as former Sen. Malcolm Wallop, whose hostility toward the U.N. is of longstanding.

In addition to Mitchell and Gingrich, members included the president of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, a vice president of the predominantly neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and two former U.N. ambassadors: Donald McHenry and Thomas Pickering, who served under Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, respectively.

"Getting the task force to agree took an enormous amount of effort," noted Gingrich. "A lot of serious negotiations went into this document."

A measure of its importance came in the form of a statement issued by Secretary-General Kofi Annan welcoming the report’s release and noting that he supports "many of its recommendations… including the creation of a Peacebuilding Commission, strengthening the Office of Internal Oversight Services and other accountability mechanisms, and revitalizing the U.N.’s human rights machinery."

The report’s recommendations fell into five major themes, including institutional reform; concrete steps to make the U.N. more effective in fighting terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD); specific measures for improving its capacity to stop genocide and mass killings; enhancing the U.N.’s role in poverty alleviation; and building capacity to conduct peacekeeping operations and promote "peace-building".

On institutional reforms, the group did not reach agreement on details for expanding the Security Council other than to support the general principle of expansion so long as it does not detract from the Council’s effectiveness.

Other institutional reforms included giving the secretary-general more power to hire and fire top officials; creating a post under the secretary-general, similar to a corporate Chief Operating Officer (COO) for a very senior official responsible for overseeing daily operations of the world body; and creating mechanisms that would encourage officials aware of wrongdoing to come forward without risking retaliation.

The group also recommended a number of reforms in the budgeting and personnel systems and called for the U.S. to explore with other member-states ways "of giving larger contributors a greater say in votes on budgetary matters without disenfranchising smaller contributors."

On fighting terrorism and WMD proliferation, the task force called for the General Assembly to quickly adopt a new convention on terrorism and promote the "naming of names" by the Security Council of state sponsors of terrorism, among other measures.

On human rights and genocide, the group echoed Annan’s recent recommendations for abolishing the U.N. Human Right Commission and creating a new Human Rights Council with a more restricted membership.

The new Council should ideally be composed of democracies, according to the task force, which also recommended that the U.S. mission at the U.N. include an official of ambassador rank whose responsibility will include promoting a Caucus of Democracies within the U.N. to better coordinate policies and voting.

Regarding its assertion of a right of unilateral intervention without Security Council authorisation in cases of genocide, mass killings, or "massive and sustained human rights violations," the task force suggested that the situation in Darfur, Sudan, represents a major test for the Security Council.

It called for the Bush administration to ask the Council to give the African Union monitoring force in Darfur a mandate to protect civilians and deploy "a sufficiently large military force to achieve that end."

Without committing U.S. combat troops to the task, the report called for Washington to do what is necessary to help the AU force protect civilians, including creating a "no-fly" zone over Darfur.

On poverty alleviation, the task force failed to agree on Annan’s of increasing development assistance to 0.7 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) but did agree "that all developed nations must raise the priority given to education, health, and economic opportunity in global affairs."

While Washington’s leadership will be essential in bringing about reform, according to the task force, a successful effort will "require bipartisanship in Washington’s approach to the United Nations."

That observation could bolster chances that the Hyde bill will be replaced by a Democratic alternative that is also due to be voted on the House floor Thursday.

Sponsored by Rep. Tom Lantos, it includes all of the proposals made by Hyde by gives to the secretary of state the power to decide whether and how much of U.S. dues should be withheld if the U.N. fails to reform. Under the Hyde bill, the cuts are mandatory.

In this case, the Bush administration, which is jealous of executive branch powers, is discreetly opposing the Hyde bill in favour of the Democratic alternative.