The Fiftieth Anniversary of Ireland's Membership of the United Nations: Looking Forward

The Fiftieth Anniversary of Ireland's Membership of the United Nations: Looking ForwardAuthor(s): Dermot AhernSource: Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 17 (2006), pp. 3-13Published by: Royal Irish AcademyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30002093 .

Accessed: 03/10/2013 05:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Royal Irish Academy is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Irish Studies inInternational Affairs.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.135.12.127 on Thu, 3 Oct 2013 05:14:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ria

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30002093?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


The Fiftieth Anniversary of Ireland's Membership of the United Nations-Looking Forward*

Dermot Ahern

Minister for Foreign Affairs

As Minister for Foreign Affairs, I wish to place on record my deep appreciation of the Royal Irish Academy's role in the study of international affairs and Ireland's role in the world. The Academy, through its Committee for the Study of International Affairs, now chaired by Dr John Doyle, provides a forum for informed debate on contemporary international developments; and its exceptionally high-quality publication of the Documents on Irish Foreign Policy series is providing an absolute treasure trove of material for academics and the interested public. I am pleased and proud that my department is closely associated with, and supports, the endeavours of the Academy.

Given the central place that the United Nations holds in Ireland's foreign policy, it is fitting that this conference commemorates the fiftieth anniversary of our membership. The theme is 'Looking forward'. I will in a moment offer some reflections on the role that the United Nations should play in the twenty-first century, and how Ireland can best support it in that role. I would like first, however, to look back and reflect briefly on what membership of the United Nations meant for Ireland when it joined the organisation.

IRELAND'S MEMBERSHIP OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Ireland had been a vigorous and committed member of the League of Nations. A distinguished Irish diplomat, Sein Lester, was its last secretary-general. And Eamon de Valera, as president of its Assembly, was a passionate advocate of its noble principles. But as these principles were first betrayed and then swept aside altogether in the march to war, for fifteen years Ireland found itself at the very margins of international events.

In particular, we were largely cut off from the great and dynamic upsurge of international cooperation and economic growth that followed the end of the Second World War. Our economy and society were introspective and sclerotic and were failing many thousands of our people, who left in search of a better life abroad. By *Opening address to the Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference of the Irish National Committee for the Study of International Affairs, 18 November 2005. The conference, entitled 'The United Nations anniversary- Looking forward', was held to mark the fiftieth anniversarn, of Ireland's accession to the UN.

Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 17 (2006), 3-13.



4 Irish Studies in International Affairs

the mid-fifties some few even questioned the very viability of our state. In such a context, entry to the United Nations was like pulling back the curtains and letting the sunlight pour in.

We are used to thinking of the United Nations as the universal organisation. After all, according to the UN Charter, membership is open to all peace-loving states. In its early years, however, the members of the UN controlled entry to what was an exclusive club. The original membership was determined by the wartime Allies and further membership was closely controlled along Cold War lines.

Eventually, these barriers were swept away by the great tide of decolonisation, with which Ireland so strongly empathised, and which we partly inspired. Membership of the United Nations became the prime symbol, and guarantee, of sovereignty. But before this new era dawned, Ireland and other countries were obliged to sit in the waiting room, while the permanent members of the Security Council negotiated a balanced package of new members.

This was a frustrating period for those knocking at the UN's door. It was especially frustrating for a state like Ireland that belonged to no military alliance and lacked a wider arena in which to advance its interests and values. When we did join, we lost no time in making it clear that we were bringing to the United Nations an approach to world issues that was determined, not by alliances, but by our own values and our own historical experience.

The first of my predecessors as minister to address the General Assembly, following our accession in December 1955, was Liam Cosgrave, who is happily still with us. There were two major events that he had to deal with in his address: the Suez crisis and the invasion of Hungary. The former demonstrated that old empires could no longer expect to ride roughshod over the interests of sovereign states; the latter exposed the ruthless brutality of a new form of tyranny. Over 30 years were to pass before Hungary fully regained its freedom. Liam Cosgrave made it crystal clear how Ireland felt about these actions, both of which underlined the volatility of international relations at the time. A year later, Frank Aiken-my predecessor both as minister and as TD for Louth-reminded the General Assembly that another world war, whatever its cause, would neither democratise nor communise the world, but annihilate it.

Ireland became dedicated to the reduction of international tensions and in particular to arms control; our efforts bore fruit eventually in the Nuclear Non- proliferation Treaty. And Ireland was not long a member of the organisation when it answered the call of the UN to send military observers into the Middle East and a Defence Forces contingent into the Congo. Since then, members of the Defence Forces and the Garda Siochana have served under the UN flag across the globe. Nothing embodies Ireland's commitment to the United Nations more tangibly and nothing has brought greater honour to this state than the service and sacrifice of the Irish men and Irish women who have worn the light blue beret with such distinction. This special contribution to the cause of peace, which was commemorated by veterans of the Congo and other missions last weekend, continues today in Liberia and elsewhere.

Foreign policy is set by governments and ministers, but is carried out by diplomats. I would like to pay tribute to the outstanding diplomatic officers who have represented Ireland with loyalty and distinction at the United Nations. I trust I will be forgiven if I single out for mention two in particular from the era of our accession: Freddie Boland, who served as president of the General Assembly in 1960, and-if he will forgive the coloration-the evergreen Conor Cruise O'Brien.



AHERN-Ireland's Membership of the UN--Looking Forward 5

A modem historian has concluded that Ireland's independent role at the United Nations in that era was 'planned far in advance, thoroughly reviewed by Irish diplomats, professionally implemented and ardently defended'.' Government and diplomatic service, therefore, worked together closely in establishing a tradition of well-considered support for effective multilateralism, which has been a central feature of Ireland's foreign policy under successive governments ever since.

ROLE AS ENVOY

It was in the spirit of this tradition that I accepted a mandate from Kofi Annan to act as one of his envoys in promoting his recommendations for United Nations reform, aimed at enhancing its effectiveness in addressing the threats and challenges of today. And I should say that in acting as envoy, I was very pleased to work closely with the secretary-general's chief of staff, Mark Malloch Brown. One of the things that struck me forcibly, as I went about my advocacy, was the sheer strength and durability of the 60-year-old UN Charter. It may need updating in a couple of places-the structure of the Security Council, for instance, is seriously outdated. But otherwise it contains everything that we need as a framework for common action for common purposes, and it should continue to serve us far into the twenty-first century.

The challenges, on the other hand, have changed. It is common ground that the effectiveness of the United Nations following the end of the Cold War was mixed. There were successes, but there were also failures. The fault lay not in the Charter, but in the failure of the international community to recognise the extent of certain threats, and the need for prompt and determined action to meet them. We are all familiar with the tragedies that took place as a result. Both the failures and the successes demonstrated more than ever the need for an effective and efficient United Nations. The international community acts most effectively when it acts together. This was Ireland's experience as a member of the Security Council during 2001 and 2002, when-in the great majority of cases-the Council acted unanimously and often successfully, particularly on African issues. But it was clear nonetheless that change was needed. When the Security Council subsequently failed to remain united on Iraq, the crisis of confidence that ensued gave the secretary-general the opportunity to set in motion a process for wide-ranging reforms. These, in turn, were placed before world leaders at last September's UN summit.

It fell to Ireland, during its EU presidency in 2004, to draft and secure agreement on the European Union's contribution to the work of the secretary-general's high- level panel. We brought to the task not only our long record of activism in the United Nations, but also our recent Security Council experience. Many elements of the EU contribution were taken up by the panel, and emerged in the secretary-general's recommendations. These recommendations were based on the now familiar premise that without development there can be no security, without security there can be no development and without respect for human rights there can be neither. The recent summit fully acknowledged that these issues are interlinked.

Of course, the outcome of the summit was far from fully satisfactory. Commitments in many areas were less ambitious or precise than one would have wished. And there was at least one major gap-the absence of any reference to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. But I think the summit achieved enough

'Joseph Morrison Skelly, Irish diplomacy at the United Nations 1945-1965, (Dublin, 1997).




to be seen as a success, provided, and it is an important provision, that the impetus for change is not lost.

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

The summit unanimously endorsed the millennium development goals (MDGs) as the benchmarks of progress towards the ending of extreme poverty-an outcome that was by no means assured in the run-up. The MDGs are in no way utopian. They are eminently achievable with political will. But it would be foolish to underestimate the challenge. Achieving them requires a partnership: the developing countries must adopt appropriate national strategies and reform their institutions, while adequate financial resources must be made available in a stable and predictable fashion. Trade and private investment also have a vital role. I believe we can achieve a very substantial degree of trade liberalisation for development, while preserving the essential interests of all.

The taoiseach at the summit committed Ireland to reaching the ODA target of 0.7% by 2012 and, in doing so, heralded a new and very exciting time for our aid programme. Details of new record levels of expenditure were announced yesterday. Similar increases will follow each year from now until 2012. The challenge of the current expansion is to continue to deliver assistance to the high standards for which Ireland has become known around the world.

NEW INITIATIVES

The expansion of our programme will enable us to consolidate those areas where we are already active. It also provides us with the opportunity for new areas of cooperation. Next year's White Paper on development, Ireland's first ever, will set out our plan of expansion over the coming years. The taoiseach has already announced a doubling of our financial commitment to funding for the fight against HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases. We will participate in the replenishment of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria by contributing C30 million over the years 2006-7.

Having recently reviewed our aid programme in depth with my colleague Minister of State Conor Lenihan, today I am announcing details of just four elements of that plan.

* A rapid response corps; * a volunteer corps; * a more visible aid programme; and * a clear commitment to UN peace-building.

Rapid response corps

The events of the past twelve months-the Indian Ocean tsunami, Niger, Pakistan- have proven beyond all doubt that the developed world lacks the mechanisms to respond rapidly to humanitarian crises in the field. At EU level, Ireland has pushed for greater emphasis on building up the Union's humanitarian response capability. At a national level, we are determined to push ahead now with the establishment of an Irish 'Rapid Response Corps'.

This corps will comprise individuals with relevant and specialist skills and experience in niche areas, who will be available to travel at short notice to situations



AHERN-Ireland's Membership of the UN-Looking Forward 7

of great need. All such individuals in the state will be invited to register with a national rapid response register. We will ensure the necessary specialised training for these key personnel. We will also pre-position humanitarian supplies, including tents and ready-to-eat meals-again, all ready to be deployed at short notice. This will result in the immediate saving of lives. In addition, we will ramp up support to the UN Joint Logistics Centre-the centre that provides the logistic framework for the World Food Programme and other agencies.

Volunteer corps

Ireland already has a dedicated, professional and world-class corps of volunteers in the developing world. We plan to augment their efforts now and bring this volunteering tradition into the mainstream. To that end, Minister Lenihan and I are establishing a 'Volunteer Corps Unit' within my department with a clear and straightforward mandate-to harness the strong volunteer spirit that exists across the country.

We will facilitate development partnerships between Irish companies and state agencies across all sectors with their counterparts in the developing world. We will harness the skills of Irish workers in industry, in education, in the health sector and across the public and private sectors-and facilitate matching their skills with needs in the developing world. We will provide greater assistance to existing volunteering and development agencies, and identify opportunities for more Irish individuals to work with groups such as the United Nations Volunteers Organisation.

However, it's not just about matching Irish skills with developing-world needs. We will also increase funding for development immersion-type visits by young people and secondary schools-building a new generation of advocates for the developing world. In addition, we will establish a 'Shop Front' where members of the public can access all information available on volunteering opportunities-and introduce an outreach programme whereby we will bring this information to communities throughout Ireland.

More visible aid programme

Ireland's aid programme belongs not to government or the aid agencies but to the Irish people who fund the programme through their taxes and support. Irish aid is making a real difference to the lives of many thousands of people every day. While this work is carried out on behalf of the Irish public, and with their money, there is little awareness of the scale and nature of the programme. This must change if we are to ensure that there is full public knowledge of, and support for, our work.

Meeting the needs of the world's poorest and most vulnerable people is one of the great challenges of our time. There is a moral imperative to act. In a world that sometimes seems increasingly insecure, it is also in our own interests to act. The millennium development goals provide a yardstick against which we can measure our efforts. To achieve the goals on target, Kofi Annan has said that we must 'break with business as usual and dramatically accelerate and scale up action until 2015'.2 Ireland is stepping up to the mark.

2Kofi Annan, 'In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all', Recommendations to the UN summit, 31 March 2005; General Assembly document A/59/2005, paragraph 3, available at http://daccessdds.un.org/UNDOC?GEN/NO5/270/78/PDF/NO527078.pdf? OpenElement (24 February 2006).




Peace-building

Sustainable development can only be achieved in an environment of peace and stability. The preservation of international peace and security is a central purpose of the United Nations. We know from our own long experience in peacekeeping and our recent term on the Security Council that where there is conflict, especially internal conflict, it is not enough to end the fighting. Preventing a return to conflict requires the strengthening of institutions, the reintegration of fighters into society and a reasonable prospect of social and economic progress. Yet the countries in question, with weak institutions or none, are those least likely to attract development funding and are the most likely to once again fall into conflict.

We therefore agreed with our EU partners early last year, at the start of our presidency of the Union, that this gap in the UN system should be filled, and that the EU should propose to the high-level panel the creation of a political body that would mobilise and coordinate resources to keep fragile states from reverting to conflict, or from falling into it in the first place. I am therefore glad to report that the UN General Assembly is well on the way to establishing a 'Peace-building Commission', along with a 'Peace-building Fund', by the end of the year, as decided at the September UN summit. The commission will be an advisory body, bringing together the authorities of the country in question; representatives of the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the UN Secretariat and other relevant agencies; major donors and contributors to the relevant peace-keeping mission; as well as the Bretton Woods institutions. It will aim to ensure a coordinated approach to the rehabilitation of countries emerging from conflict that places them firmly on the road to lasting stability and development.

It is essential, if the 'Peace-building Commission' is to succeed, that the countries that it aims to assist feel the fullest possible ownership of the process. The government is committed to working closely with the commission, as an essential bridge between peacekeeping and long term development cooperation. As part of our increased development budget and in line with the best traditions of Irish foreign policy, we intend to make a very substantial contribution to the 'Peace-building Fund'. And, while the modalities of the Peace-building Commission's operation are not yet clear, we are going to explore very actively indeed how Irish personnel, either seconded to the commission or working alongside it, can contribute to its work.

CONFLICT PREVENTION/ROLE OF REGIONAL ORGANISATIONS

It is much better, of course, if conflict is avoided in the first place. And the remarkable thing-contrary to what most people may think-is that it is increasingly being avoided. One of the most interesting documents I have seen recently is the Human security report 2005,3 which documents a quite striking decline in the number of wars, genocides and human-rights abuses over the past decade. To take one statistic: since the early 1990s there has been an 80% decrease in the number of conflicts producing at least 1000 deaths in battle a year. The report, which is not a United Nations document but is produced for the Canadian Human Security Centre by a very experienced team of specialists, convincingly ascribes the decline to the UN-led, post- Cold War upsurge in peacekeeping, peace-building and conflict prevention.

3Human Security Centre, Human security report 2005: war and peace in the 21st century, (New York-Oxford, 2005), available at http://www.humansecurityreport.info/index.php?option=content& task=view&id=28&Itemid=63 (24 February 2006).




Despite the huge problems that still exist, this is deeply encouraging. It shows that concerted international activity, led by and under the umbrella of the UN, can and does make a real difference. It gives the lie to many of the assertions made by the critics of the UN and of the multilateral approach. Indeed, leaders at the summit fully recognised the role played in conflict prevention by the UN secretary-general, through the exercise of his good offices, and indicated their support for efforts to strengthen the organisation's capacity in this area.

The UN cannot, nonetheless, do everything, and should not have to act on its own in every crisis. When Kofi Annan was here in Ireland a year ago, he made it clear how much the UN needed and appreciated the cooperation of regional organisations. He thanked Ireland for the work done during its presidency to enhance EU cooperation with the UN. The 'Outcome document' that emerged from the September UN summit4 specifically mentions the importance of the EU's security and defence policy, including the development of its rapid response capacity. EU-UN cooperation has now been developed further, and a number of EU-led peace support operations have taken place, and are taking place. The African Union is carrying the major share of the burden in Western Sudan, with the cooperation of the EU and others, and with the authorisation of the UN Security Council. NATO and the EU, mandated by the Security Council, are carrying out similar tasks in Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan, and Ireland is making an active contribution to these missions.

Ireland and other developed countries have military capacities and assets that are as yet unavailable in many developing countries, and they must remain at the disposal of the United Nations. The highly successful joint Irish-Swedish Quick Reaction Force in Liberia is an example of the kind of element-what Kofi Annan has called a 'force multiplier'-that makes the rest of the peacekeeping force effective. I want to make it clear, therefore, that it is the government's view that peacekeeping in Africa or elsewhere should not be left solely to the countries of the region.

RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT

A key outcome of the UN's September summit was the acceptance that, notwithstanding article 2.7 of the UN Charter, which excludes intervention in matters falling within the domestic jurisdiction of any state, the international community has a responsibility to protect populations against genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This is, in effect, a commitment made at the highest level to ensure that events such as those in Rwanda and Srebrenica never happen again. As the taoiseach told the summit, threats to peace nowadays arise chiefly from internal strife, and these threats do not stop at national borders. Peace and security require the exercise by national governments of their sovereign responsibility to protect their citizens, and, where they do not exercise it, the international community has a right, indeed a duty, to step in. This includes, should it prove necessary, by coercive measures, although military force must always be a last resort.

4UN General Assembly resolution, A/RES/60/1, 24 October 2005 (New York, 2005), available at http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/NO5/487/60/PDF/NO548760.pdfOpenElement (24 February 2006).




I hope that the terms of the commitment made by leaders at the summit will effectively overcome one major problem that has stood in the way of effective action up to now. The international community has, since the 1948 Convention on Genocide, long accepted a responsibility to prevent genocide. Sadly, but perhaps inevitably, when populations were threatened and efforts were made to invoke this convention, the question was asked: 'But is this genocide?' From now we should not any more have to witness grotesque efforts to calculate just how many murders add up to genocide. The principle of the responsibility to protect suffering populations, irrespective of the precise definition of the nature of their agony, has been firmly established. I hope it will never be necessary to act on the principle but, if it is necessary, there can be simply no excuse not to act.

TERRORISM

The Security Council, even before 11 September 2001, identified terrorism as a threat to international peace and security. As we have seen again in recent weeks, terrorists threaten all states, rich and poor, of all religious and ethnic characters. Ireland and its EU partners are working inside and outside the EU to develop policies and actions that would make it more difficult for terrorists to operate. The EU Action Plan was first established under the Irish presidency in response to the 2004 Madrid bombings and has been developed and refined since then, with a review every six months by the European Council.

At the UN we are, I hope, close to agreeing a comprehensive convention against terrorism, following the establishment of 13 previous conventions addressing various aspects of terrorism. However, conventions on their own are not enough. I hope that, once the new convention is agreed, we will quickly begin negotiations on a global counter-terrorism strategy, agreed and implemented by all states.

The fight against terrorism must, of course, be carried out in full respect for human-rights norms. The violation of such norms is not only wrong in itself but it is also counter-productive as it can be used to justify further atrocities. It moreover undermines the authority of states and leaders who seek to promote respect for human rights and the rule of law.

HUMAN RIGHTS

Human rights will remain a central focus of Ireland's foreign policy. A key part of this will be to continue to work for a strengthening of the machinery of the United Nations in this area. I think it is fair to say that the human rights work of the United Nations, and of its Commission on Human Rights (CHR), has fluctuated in its effectiveness. It did outstanding work in creating the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and in establishing a range of human-rights norms. In recent years, however, the CHR, while continuing to do indispensable work, has increasingly become a theatre for sterile battles between those who wish to extend human rights and those who have, with increasing effectiveness, been resisting efforts to call violators to account. It also has many practical deficiencies.

The secretary-general recommended a new departure, in the form of a Human Rights Council meeting regularly through the year and dealing with human-rights situations as they arose. The September UN summit agreed in principle but, I am afraid, left the detail to be worked out. The EU, for its part, is firmly committed to working for the establishment of the new Human Rights Council by the end of this




year; however, the issues are complex and the negotiations intense. Ireland, in this regard, is placing particular emphasis on ensuring that the very positive involvement of civil society in the work of the CHR will be carried forward in the new body.

Good human-rights practices and the rule of law do not emerge by themselves in developing countries and in countries in transition. Laws must be adopted and the capacity to observe them must be developed. I would like to pay tribute to the work of Mary Robinson in raising the profile of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and developing its role in this crucial area. This helped lay the groundwork for the agreement at the summit to double the resources of that office to help in capacity-building and technical assistance. This work is necessarily slow, and requires patience, but it will be a critical part of the UN's work for human security in the years ahead.

I would like to emphasise one final point in this area-exhortation and condemnation, while important and necessary, are simply not enough. Ultimately, the effectiveness of any action must be judged by whether it serves to promote and protect the observance of human rights on the ground.

DISARMAMENT AND NON-PROLIFERATION

Unfortunately, there are threats that the summit did not properly address. The taoiseach and I made clear our dismay at the inability to reach agreement on disarmament and non-proliferation, especially following the failure earlier this year of the Non-proliferation Treaty review conference. There remains an obscene contrast between spending on arms and spending on development. I am appalled at the evident weakening of international commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and indeed other disarmament treaties, and at the failure of some countries to assure the world of the peaceful nature of their nuclear programmes. I am also deeply troubled by the resistance of some countries to entering into a binding agreement on illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons: these, as we all know, have caused vast devastation, particularly in Africa.

Everything points more and more to the validity of Ireland's long-held position that disarmament and non-proliferation, while one should never be a precondition for the other, are mutually reinforcing. We must continue to insist that countries comply with their non-proliferation obligations, but the prospects of success would be very much greater in the context of a convincing commitment to disarmament. And in this regard the greatest onus, in my view, rests on nuclear-weapons states to take the lead and show by force of example that further progress is possible. Instead, we have witnessed a depressing and deeply short-sighted retreat from the positive developments of the 1990s and from the commitments freely undertaken at the 2000 NPT review conference, in particular.

SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM

The September summit reaffirmed the authority of the Security Council to mandate coercive action, and its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. But no agreement was reached on the reform of the Security Council's composition. This is, of course, a highly complex and divisive issue. As envoy, I sought to avoid comment on it, because I thought this would detract from my effectiveness in focusing attention on the other significant issues on the agenda.




That said, it is clear, as the secretary-general himself has said, that the Security Council does not adequately reflect the world as it now is. Ireland will approach future work on its reform on the basis of a number of key principles. First, we wish to see an increase in the size of the Council to reflect the realities of the twenty-first century. Second, that increase should be regionally balanced, including enhancing the role of Africa. Third, any change should not lessen the capacity of smaller member states, like Ireland, to continue to aspire to membership from time to time. Fourth, while we would ideally wish to see the complete removal of the veto, there should be no conferral of new veto powers. Fifth, an expanded Security Council should accommodate member states that play a particularly significant role in the UN system, for instance financially, in peacekeeping or through their capacity for regional leadership.

Management Reform

The members of the United Nations deserve a secretariat that operates to the highest standards of efficiency, effectiveness and accountability. This is not something of interest merely to the major contributors, but to all the member states, so that the organisation can work for them in the best way possible. The secretary-general has long been committed to applying such standards.

Change and modernisation are sensitive matters in any organisation. They are particularly sensitive in an international organisation, as all of its member states have a stake in what it does. In discussing UN reform, I believe it is important to distinguish between what the secretariat does, which is the province of the member states, and how it does it, where the secretary-general should have the lead role. It is obvious from the report on the administration of the Oil-for-Food Programme that both the member states and the secretariat have lessons to learn. I welcome the measures that the secretary-general has already taken, and look forward to working with our EU partners on the further proposals that the summit has invited him to make to enhance the effective management of the UN and to update the organisation. I can only hope that member states will be as diligent in examining their own failings.

CONCLUSION

We will never reach a moment when we will finally be able to announce that the United Nations is now reformed, and therefore perfect. This is not how the world is. The world moves on, and the UN must move with it. Reform will always be a work in progress. New challenges will emerge, some threats will fade, others will arise, nations will lose or gain power and influence, and the UN must adapt.

The organisation has passed through a period of unprecedented challenge, which left it struggling to catch up. Despite this, it remains the essential source of legitimacy for our common action in support of international peace and security, and an indispensable framework for universal action on the wide range of economic and social problems that confront us.

I passionately believe that the United Nations, for all its flaws and failures, remains indispensable and irreplaceable. Of course, the real too often diverges from




the ideal. The work of the United Nations can be messy and inadequate. To the dismay of its friends, its procedures can too easily be exploited by those who ignore and pervert its core values, and who wish to block the efforts of those who try to act on those values. It can be sluggish and inefficient.

But it, and it alone, is based on a recognition of the essential equality of all of the peoples of the world and of the states in which they are organised. It, and it alone, seeks to take a fully holistic view of all the challenges and threats faced by humanity. The experience of our 50 years of membership is that the United Nations can be a powerful force for good, and it can truly be said that if it did not exist, we would surely seek to invent it.

The United Nations can only be as effective as its member states together allow it to be. Ireland will continue to work with its international partners to ensure that we implement what we have agreed, try to achieve consensus on what remains to be done and, above all, collectively commit ourselves to the United Nations as the central, pivotal organisation that will nobly and effectively serve the people of the world long into the future.



Date post:	19-Dec-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dermot-ahern
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times