Sunday Times 2
Will the Taliban emirate occupy UN seat
UNITED NATIONS (IPS) – When the high-level segment of the 76th session of the UN General Assembly opens September 21, the new Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is unlikely to occupy a much-coveted seat in the world body.
But still, it is expected to eventually wind its way to the Assembly Hall later this year– provided it has the blessings of the UN’s Credentials Committee (whose nine new members will be announced next week) and the 193-member General Assembly.
And perhaps more importantly, the Biden administration has to establish diplomatic relations with the Taliban government, whose officials may be on a US sanctions list which bars them from entering the United States.
As of now, a guessing game is on. Will it, or will it not, make it to the General Assembly this year?
If it does, the Taliban government will be one of the first UN member states – or perhaps the only UN member state — which is headed by an insurgent group once designated as a “terrorist organisation” by the United States.
Thomas G. Weiss, Distinguished Fellow, Global Governance, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and Presidential Professor of Political Science, told IPS that immense uncertainty will surround the Taliban government’s assuming the Afghanistan seat at the United Nations.
Unlike a new member state that requires a Security Council approval, a change in government is normally automatic with the Credentials Committee approving and then the General Assembly rubber stamping, said Weiss who has written extensively on the politics of the
United Nations.
In the case of the Taliban, he pointed out, time is short and, of course, the change was not the product of an election. Given the Taliban’s past and current behaviour, many member states are likely to object, he predicted.
Still, there has to be an alternative government to object, and so it is crucial to see whether (former Afghan President) Ashraf Ghani (who fled to the United Arab Emirates) will come out of hiding and object.
“That is unlikely, but if he does, I think that the historical precedent would resemble Cambodia/Kampuchea and Sihanouk/Khmer Rouge rather than the ongoing discussions about Myanmar,” said Weiss, Director Emeritus, Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at the City University of New York (CUNY) Graduate Center.
Ambassador Barbara Woodward of the UK, a permanent member of the Security Council, said last week that UK will calibrate its approach to the Taliban based on the choices and actions they now take – namely on safe passage, terrorism, humanitarian access, human rights and inclusive government.
Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, former Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of the UN told IPS: “I think Afghan situation is somewhat more complicated.”
The Taliban government has not been recognised yet by many states — normally a change in government does not need recognition. Also, the new Taliban government has not appointed a Permanent Representative to the UN or asked the UN to accept his credentials,
he noted.
There are a number of functional things which need to be sorted out and followed before the Credentials Committee (CC) considers the matter.
“I think the CC would take its time to consider the credentials of the new Afghan representative to the UN and subsequently of its delegation to the 76th session. I am sure UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs is fully seized with the matter and would advise the CC, if asked on behalf of the Secretary-General. Much, however, depends on how the US and other Western countries would like to address the question,” Ambassador Chowdhury noted.
Weiss pointed out that there will be a new Credentials Committee (when the 76th sessions open on September 21).
“As merely a majority vote in the General Assembly is required, I would have thought that it would be difficult not to seat the Taliban, especially as China seems to be courting the new government, undoubtedly dangling investment and recognition in exchange for the commitment to steer clear of supporting the Uyghurs”.
If China insists and calls upon its other clients, there will be the required 50 percent. US and Western “silence” (not assent) could probably be secured for guarantees about safe transit for the remaining citizens and supporters trapped in Afghanistan.
Continue leverage will result from the requirement to issue visas to individuals on the list of terrorists, Weiss declared.
Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken clearly laid out the US position last week: “The Taliban says it seeks international legitimacy and international support. And that will depend entirely on what it does, not just on what it says. And the trajectory of its relationship with us and with the rest of the world will depend on its actions”.
Now, the Taliban has made a series of commitments, publicly and privately, including with regard to freedom of travel, with regard to combatting terrorism and not allowing Afghanistan to be used a launching point for terrorism directed at us or at anyone else, including as well upholding the basic rights of the Afghan people, to include women and girls and minorities, to have some inclusivity in government, to
avoid reprisals.
And these are very important commitments, he added.
The international community has also set clear expectations of the Taliban-led government. More than 100 countries signed onto a statement that the US initiated on those very commitments. The United Nations Security Council has made clear its expectations.
“And so, for us – and not just for us, for many countries around the world – the nature of the relationship with the government going forward will depend on the actions it takes,” said Blinken.