Quick Link

for your convenience!

Reforming the United Nations for the Next Century

Remarks by David Kilgour, Secretary of State (Latin America & Africa)
at the annual Model United Nations, Mount Royal College, Calgary
March 7, 1998

It is a pleasure to be here with you today at your Model United Nations, and to share some thoughts on how the United Nations can adapt to the challenges of the next century.

Before looking ahead at the future of the UN, let’s take a brief look back in time. It is often helpful when looking at the road ahead to reflect back on where we have travelled.

At the time of the first talks by the four major international powers aimed at establishing the United Nations in 1944, the world was a very different place. Nazi Germany still controlled parts of Europe, and Japan still occupied many islands of the Pacific. The Soviet Union was our ally, and the Communist government had not yet come to power in China. Most of the countries of Africa, and even many in Asia, were still colonies. The 50 countries that came together in San Francisco to found the United Nations in April 1945 were determined not to repeat the mistakes of the ill-fated League of Nations.

Little did the UN’s founders realize how profoundly the world would change in just a few years after its formation. The institutions they developed to deal with the post-World War Two situation suddenly faced a new global reality. The world was divided into the two hostile camps of the Cold War, and an increasing number of newly independent countries – known as the Third World – often allied themselves with the two superpowers, or proclaimed themselves to be nonaligned. It was in this divided world of the Cold War that the United Nations came of age. The paralysis of the Cold War, however, made it difficult for the UN to achieve its potential.

Just as quickly as the Cold War appeared, it ended less than a decade ago. The bipolar world became a world of many poles. New challenges to global security came to the fore – challenges that were always there, but that seemed less significant in the face of the Cold War threat of global annihilation. These new challenges included a wider range of issues: environmental, criminal, terrorism, poverty, corruption, health, governance and human rights. Today we use the term "human security" to describe our response to these new challenges. No longer are these security issues merely government-to-government matters. Increasingly they require involvement of many other actors from civil society. As such, they require new kinds of international response.

Changed understanding of security

Changes to the geopolitical map and to our understanding of "human security" have given impetus to the need to reform the United Nations, to bring it more in line with today’s realities. Canada has always viewed the UN as the main vehicle for pursuing global security objectives and global problem solving. This reflects our long-standing commitment to the principal of multilateralism. We place high value in the smooth functioning of the UN, and so we are at the forefront of efforts to reform it for the next century.

Canada played a leadership role in calling for UN reform at the Halifax and Lyon G-7 Summits. We have promoted reform objectives aimed at improving the UN’s performance in several major areas: finance and management, conflict prevention and resolution, reform of the Security Council, peacekeeping and peacebuilding, and reforms to the UN’s economic and social development activities.

Last year UN Secretary General Kofi Annan introduced a set of reforms aimed at streamlining and modernizing the UN. Canada strongly supports these reforms and wishes to see them implemented promptly. Existing institutions must be updated and their structures brought into line with the world of today. Cost reduction along with streamlining of the organization must be aimed at greater effectiveness and efficiency.

The makeup of the UN membership has changed dramatically in its lifetime. It is now a body of 185 members, of which countries with democratically elected governments are in the majority. The ideological rivalries of the Cold War era have been replaced by issue-based coalitions. In this more democratic climate, reforms cannot be imposed from above, but require agreement and cooperation among countries in a spirit of openness and innovation.

Canadian priorities

What then are Canada’s major priorities for reform?

Canada has advocated various measures to improve the UN’s financing and management, and to solve cash flow problems. We favour greater cost-effectiveness throughout the system, better management of human resources, a delayering of bureaucracy, and better coordinated management of the UN system. Canada advocates a zero nominal growth for UN budgets and a reform of the scale of assessments based on equity and which better reflects countries’ capacities to pay.

Member states must pay their dues, as Canada does, for the UN to be on a sound financial footing. They are obligated to pay in full, on time, and without conditions. Currently, however, the UN faces a financial crisis because member states owe $2.2 billion U.S. to the United Nations for regular and peacekeeping budgets. Of this amount, 60 per cent is owed by the United States. I am hopeful that the U.S. Congress will see fit to remedy this. Arrears to the organization should be settled as a priority.

Conflict resolution

Conflict prevention and resolution is a key area of UN reform in which Canada has been actively involved. We all know the tragedy that occurred in Rwanda when the international community did not respond quickly enough. Detailed planning and mounting of the UN peacekeeping operation were excruciatingly slow, and the deployment of troops took place months after they were officially committed. Canada has made a number of recommendations aimed at increasing the UN’s rapid deployment capability. These include proposals to improve the Standby Arrangements’ System and to assist the UN in implementing the Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters. Other recommendations call for greater human rights monitoring, and a more effective role for the UN in post-conflict situations.

Canada has been a strong supporter of peacekeeping operations since their beginnings with the Suez Crisis in 1956. It was for his role in that crisis that Lester B. Pearson received a Nobel Peace Prize. Since then, Canada has participated in the overwhelming majority of peacekeeping operations established by the Security Council. As of last year, we were the sixth largest UN troop contributor, with more than 1,000 personnel deployed in UN operations around the world. Tens of thousands of Canadians have served in 30 different UN missions, and more than 100 have lost their lives doing so. It is no wonder then that Canada has a stake in improving the efficiency of peacekeeping operations. In 1995, in the 50th year of the UN, Canada presented a ground-breaking study on UN rapid reaction capability.

In the area of economic and social reform at the UN, Canada has also put forward ideas for needed changes. Canada has suggested reforms to streamline the Secretariat involved in development, to strengthen the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and review specialized agencies to eliminate overlap. Other proposals aim to get better value for development money.

Security Council reform

One of the most controversial elements of UN reform is change to the makeup of the Security Council. There have been proposals to expand the membership to take into account the increased international role of countries that were not among the major World War II allies, as well as developing countries. Canada wants to see a Security Council that is more effective, transparent, and broadly representative. Above all, it should be less elitist and more democratic. Canada has periodically been represented on the Security Council as a non-permanent member, and we are again a candidate for 1999-2000. We believe that any expansion of the Security Council should, for the time being, be for the non-permanent members. This doesn’t preclude adding new permanent members at a later stage. It is essential to Canada, though, that any change to the composition of the Council should not prejudge Canada’s traditional representation on the Council at least once a decade.

As mentioned, Canada supports the package of reforms introduced by Secretary General Annan. One of the outcomes of these reforms has been the establishment of the position of Deputy Secretary General, the number two position in the UN hierarchy. We are pleased that Louise Fréchette, from Canada, was named to that position in January. This reflects Canada’s continued commitment to the UN.

As you can see, Canada’s agenda for reform at the United Nations aims to make that organization function more smoothly. These measures are realistic and can be put into place in the near future, given sufficient international will. The UN has been far from perfect, and I have sometimes been among its critics. It is, though, the only vehicle capable of exercising moral authority on a global scale. Canada’s support for the UN is not accidental. No country today can act alone on the world stage. That is especially true in the case of a country with limited military and economic power. Canada can only be effective in concert with other like-minded countries. The United Nations provides the best forum for creating these international coalitions. We have a huge stake in the continued success of the United Nations, and that is why we are playing a leading role in its reform.