inside the glass house

General Assembly Vs. Security Council: Battle spreads to race for UN top post
NEW YORK-- A turf war between the 191-member General Assembly and the 15-member Security Council is threatening to spillover into the upcoming battle for the next UN secretary-general.

While the General Assembly is the highest policy making body at the UN, the Security Council is the elitist body with veto-wielding members exercising power to declare war and peace.

Traditionally, the Security Council "recommends" a single name for secretary-general -- after several rounds of voting, and vetoing each other's candidates -- and then requests the General Assembly to approve the final candidate, thereby reducing the Assembly to a virtual "rubber stamp".

But there may be a revolt of the slaves later this year judging by a nasty battle between the two organs of the UN -- triggered primarily by the abrasive US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton.

Despite strong protests by the 132-member Group of 77 and the 114-member Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) -- the two biggest groups comprising developing nations -- Bolton held two Council meetings last month, one on a UN audit report on procurement and management, and the other on sexual exploitation in UN peacekeeping.

Both subjects were considered within the purview of the General Assembly, not the Security Council. The Group of 77 and NAM accused the Security Council of trying to "encroach" into General Assembly territory.
Bolton was able to pull this off because he held the rotating presidency of the Security Council for February, and thereby determines the agenda for the month.

"The Non-Aligned Movement remains particularly concerned over the exercise of norm-setting and establishment of definitions by the Security Council in areas beyond its competencies," said Ambassador Hamidon Ali of Malaysia, current chair of NAM.

In a letter to the President of the General Assembly, the Malaysian envoy also referred to the ''encroachment by the Security Council on the functions and powers of the General Assembly."

With the ongoing battle for turf, the General Assembly may want to assert its powers in the appointment of the new secretary-general, rather than do the bidding of the Security Council.

According to a "non-paper" prepared by the Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, the appointment of the secretary-general by the General Assembly "should not be regarded as an automatic or merely mechanical event".

"The General Assembly must surely exercise its judgment in concluding that the person recommended by the Security Council merits appointment."
But the current practice "does not provide for any means -- formal or informal -- by which the General Assembly can develop knowledge about the candidate(s) sufficient to allow it to exercise that judgment in an informed and responsible way."

However, if the General Assembly feels that the candidate recommended by the Security Council isn't suitable for the job, it has the power to reject the candidate, and ask the Council to come up with a new name. Although this has not happened before, it is still possible under the current rules of procedure.

When the Security Council remained deadlocked in 1950 over an additional five-year term to then Secretary-General Trygve Lie of Norway, the General Assembly stepped in to extend his term of office, without a recommendation from the Council.

This was considered an exceptional case but has assumed relevance in the current political tug-of-war between the Security Council and the General Assembly.

With five veto-wielding permanent members -- the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia -- the Security Council has always taken the lead in the selection process for the secretary-general over the last 60 years. The votes determining the appointment of a new secretary-general have come mostly from the five permanent members.

In 1996, the United States displayed its veto power by casting the only negative vote against a second term for Boutros Boutros-Ghali, despite the fact that the remaining 14 members of the Security Council voted for the Egyptian. Even an overwhelming majority did not save Boutros-Ghali because of a single veto.

Last week the 53-member African Group at the United Nations, the second largest regional group after Asia, formally expressed its collective support for an Asian as the next secretary-general of the world body.

In a letter to the 54-member Asian Group, Ambassador Joe Robert Pemagbi of Sierra Leone, chairman of the African Group, said his Group has decided "to support the request that the next UN secretary-general be selected from an Asian country". The African Group's decision "is consistent with the longstanding principle of reciprocity and understanding which exists between the two groups", the letter said.

So far, the three officially declared Asian candidates are Jayantha Dhanapala of Sri Lanka, a former U.N. under-secretary-general for disarmament affairs; Thai Deputy Prime Minister Surakiart Sathirathai; and South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-Moon. A fourth potential candidate is East Timorese Foreign Minister and Nobel Laureate Jose Ramos-Horta, who admits he is weighing the possibility of running for the job, which falls vacant in January next year.

Both China and Russia, two veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council, have indicated their support for an Asian as the next secretary-general. "Asian people haven't taken the important post for 35 years, and Asia is the most populous continent," says Liu Jianchao, a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry. "We think the next secretary-general should be picked from Asian nations." Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been quoted as saying that Moscow "supports a candidate from Asia".

Richard Holbrooke, a former US ambassador to the UN, said last month: "A lot of people have thrown up a lot of names, but in the real world the fact that the Asians have not had a secretary-general since U. Thant (of Burma) is of tremendous importance to China, and China will make damn sure it happens."

But the Americans could spring a surprise because they are privately rooting for a candidate from Eastern Europe. If the Chinese and the Russians abstain on the vote without exercising their vetoes, the US candidate can prevail.

With a total of 107 votes, however, the Asian and African groups have more than half the majority in the 191-member General Assembly to reject an Eastern European candidate. But will they?

Back to Columns