UNITED NATIONS: U.N. Bodies Under Scrutiny

By Thalif Deen Reprint | | Print |

Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Apr 22 1997 (IPS) - The head of the United Nations’ highest policy making body wants every U.N. institution brought under scrutiny as part of the current restructuring of the financially ailing world body.

“After two or three decades, if U.N. bodies are not properly examined, they go to seed,” says Ambassador Razali Ismail of Malaysia, president of the 185-member General Assembly.

He says the international community should re-examine the role and mandates of all U.N. bodies in order to sort out the good from the bad and the ugly. “The United Nations is in trouble today because of 50 years of neglect and baggage,” Razali told IPS.

There are some 25 U.N. funds and programmes, including the U.N. Development Programme (UNDP), the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), the U.N. Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the U.N. Conference on Trade Development (UNCTAD).

The United Nations also has 16 Specialised Agencies, including the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), and the U.N. Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO).

Western nations have singled out the Geneva-based UNCTAD and the Vienna-based UNIDO as two U.N. bodies that should either be downsized or dismantled. But both institutions have undertaken, on their own, the task of reducing staff, eliminating waste, and abolishing duplication.

“I believe UNCTAD has done a very good job in re-examining itself,” with the result that it is “a more vibrant institution,” Razali said. “UNIDO is also undergoing a similar process, even as many countries continue to underline the importance of the agency in bringing industrial experience to developing nations.”

The Malaysian envoy, however, pointed out that U.N. bodies that can be dismantled should be abolished. “Why should there be a problem about that?” he asked. “I wouldn’t like to think that the South wants to prevent the abolition of U.N. bodies that are anachronistic or redundant. ”

UNDP Administrator Gus Speth agrees that changes should be made to bring about a leaner and more effective United Nations.

As part of the ongoing reform process, he said, there is a tremendous advantage in merging departments and consolidating functions among U.N. bodies. “These things can happen and should happen,” he added.

“But I was never one of those who thought that the purpose of U.N. reform was to go trophy-hunting,” he told IPS. “I never thought that scratching acronyms off the list was a ticket to real reform.”

For one thing, he says, he does not subscribe to the view that UNIDO should be abolished. “We use UNIDO extensively in our development cooperation work,” he noted, adding that UNIDO has also undergone reforms and restructuring.

Canada, one of the Western nations actively supporting the reform of the U.N. system, argues against the duplication of U.N. bodies. But Canadian diplomats say new bodies should also be created if necessary.

“We should not hesitate to eliminate those programmes or bodies that no longer serve any useful purpose,” says Canadian Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy. “Nor should we hesitate to create new instruments, within existing resources, to deal with the challenges of the day.”

“Reform is more than just cost-cutting, though that aspect must not be ignored,” he says.

In a comprehensive paper on U.N. reform, the Nordic countries say that the integration of the U.N. presence and activities in the economic and social fields should lead to a unified development system, which should be organised into a single U.N. office.

The five Nordic countries — Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden — also say that all members of the U.N. development system should be represented by one common representative at the country level.

“The integration of U.N. agencies should not jeopardise the identity of the organisations. The goal should be effective unification of the system,” the Nordics say.