UNITED NATIONS: U.S. Declared Veto of Boutros-Ghali Starts Race

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 18 1996 (IPS) - U.S. determination to veto a new term for U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali will throw the United Nations into a period of intense confusion, beginning with a vote on Boutros-Ghali’s fate Tuesday.

Boutros-Ghali, whose actions so far suggest that he will not go down quietly, remains a candidate who enjoys the support of least 13 of the U.N. Security Council’s 15 members.

But the declaration Monday that the most powerful member, the United States, will veto him on Tuesday ensures that new contenders will emerge to challenge the Egyptian incumbent in the coming days.

Washington said it will, if necessary, cast the lone opposing vote Tuesday to a resolution submitted by ten Council members — Botswana, Chile, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Indonesia and Russia — that urges a second five-year term for Boutros-Ghali, beginning next January and ending on the last day of 2001.

But, as U.S. Ambassador Madeleine Albright said repeatedly here in a reference to a campaign slogan by President Bill Clinton, Boutros-Ghali “is not on our bridge to the twenty-first century.” Washington maintains it will not accept Boutros-Ghali, no matter how many times it must veto him.

Yet the Clinton administration, re-elected only two weeks ago, is also eager not to let its hard line on Boutros-Ghali offend other nations, including veto-wielding members China, France and Russia, who are so far sticking by the incumbent. Of the Council’s five permanent members, only Britain, which is now also likely to support Boutros-Ghali, has been silent on its final position on his fate.

“This is not a happy day for the U.S. mission,” said one senior U.S. official Monday. “This is a sad day. We had tried for the past few months to avoid any confrontation over the Secretary- General,” he said on condition he not be named.

The White House signaled its intention six months ago to oppose Boutros-Ghali re-election, contending he had not done enough to reform the United Nations.

At the time, U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher had offered Boutros-Ghali a one-year extension to complete the work he has begun. The Egyptian diplomat was offended by the suggestion, and reportedly responded: “Is this a tip? If so, it’s not very generous.”

Boutros-Ghali’s aides have hinted he would accept a two-year extension. U.S. officials, however, say that option is no longer on the table.

Many countries — and aides to Boutros-Ghali himself — assumed that the early veto threat was a campaign tactic by Clinton in his own run against Republican Senator Bob Dole, who, in pandering to the his party’s right wing, frequently ridiculed the secretary- general’s name in his own campaign speeches.

But U.S. diplomats contend that Clinton will not waver in his decision to dump Boutros-Ghali. They insist the decision is a pragmatic one to win greater support for the world body in the Republican-led U.S. Congress.

“Fairly or unfairly…our Congress has lost confidence in this secretary-general,” the senior U.S. official said. “His re- election would make it virtually impossible to obtain the hundreds of millions of dollars we need to pay back the United Nations.” The United States, the biggest U.N. debtor, owes the world body some 1.5 billion dollars.

“This is business, and the business of the United Nations is more important than any secretary-general,” he added.

But for many other countries, Boutros-Ghali’s re-election is more important than U.S. political considerations. The Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and Arab League are still in Boutros-Ghali’s corner, as is France and many Francophone states. On Monday, the Chinese government said in a statement from Beijing that it also backs the incumbent.

“The Secretary-General has no intention of withdrawing,” U.N. spokeswoman Sylvana Foa said Monday.

Boutros-Ghali’s partisans hope that the current U.N. chief can win a new term despite a veto from one permanent member, much as the first secretary-general, Trygve Lie of Norway, won a new term even after the then-Soviet Union vetoed him in 1951. Lie won after the Security Council sent the dispute to the General Assembly, where the larger body voted him in for another term.

However, as one U.S. diplomat noted, Lie never enjoyed the Soviets’ support and was replaced two years later. The lesson, he told IPS, is that “a secretary-general cannot perform effectively without the support of all the permanent members” — a lesson, he added, that Boutros-Ghali should keep in mind about Washington.

In any case, one consequence of the U.S. veto will hinder Boutros-Ghali’s quest for a new term: the expected emergence of possibly dozens of contenders. “Therace begins now,” the senior U.S. official said.

Most countries agree that, whatever Boutros-Ghali’s fate, the preference for a new term is for an African candidate. Washington has also said it will be comfortable with an African replacing Boutros-Ghali, the first African to lead the United Nations.

Top contenders for the post are Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Kofi Annan, a Ghanaian; Salim Ahmed Salim, the Tanzanian secretary-general of the OAU; and Hamid Algabid of Niger, head of the Islamic Conference Organisation.

No contender stands out, however. Annan has reportedly been hurt by the idea that Washington favours him; as one U.S. source noted, there may be “retaliatory voting” following Washington’s veto of Boutros-Ghali. Salim is favoured by China, since he played a role in Beijing’s 1971 entry into the United Nations, at the expense of Taiwan.

Some international women’s groups have sought the first female secretary-general, and Albright, one of the few female ambassadors here, has voiced support for that goal. But most female contenders are European — including Irish President Mary Robinson and outgoing Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland.

Another strong contender, U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Sadako Ogata of Japan, is hurt by China’s distaste for any Japanese candidate. Beijing argued just two weeks ago that Japan still has not apologised sufficiently for its role in the Second World War to sit at the head of the world body.

As a result, Foa said, “we’re not particularly discouraged” by the first round of the secretary-general race. “This is how you play the game,” she noted of the initial rebuff to the man she expects to remain as her boss for at least a few more years.