Former director general of the International Labor Organization, the Briton Guy Ryder was appointed in October 2022 to the position of Deputy Secretary General in charge of policies within the cabinet of Antonio Guterres, the boss of the UN. Aware that the incapacity of the Security Council has a devastating effect on the credibility of the organization, he pleads for urgent reforms.
According to him, the United Nations, inherited from the geopolitics of 1945, should better reflect current power relations. The Future Summit, which the United Nations is organizing in September in New York, aims precisely to make the organization “better adapted to the reality of the world” and to the emergence of new challenges, such as artificial intelligence. . Although he remains hopeful, Guy Ryder does not deny, however, that the path will be strewn with pitfalls. Interview.
At a time when two major conflicts are raging in Ukraine and Gaza, which the UN is unable to stop, the organization is the target of numerous criticisms. To the point that many are asking the question: is it still useful?
Guy Ryder Undeniably, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza raise the question of the usefulness of the United Nations in the field of peacekeeping. And this raises doubts about their effectiveness in other areas. These critiques, however, tend to focus on the UN Security Council, a highly visible and highly political body. When it is incapable of making decisions, reacting effectively to dramatic situations, and even condemning them, it is the UN as a whole that is misjudged. This unfortunately does not take into account the fact that this organization has a much broader scope of action, which goes beyond the decisions of the Security Council.
In the case of Ukraine, we could cite the Black Sea grain agreement [NDLR : désormais caduque], negotiations to secure the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, or even the facilitation of prisoner exchanges. It nevertheless remains true that the conflict continues. And that the international community, including the UN, has been unable to put an end to it.
Same observation for Gaza. But let us not forget that despite the extreme constraints and difficulties, the role of the United Nations is extremely important in terms of humanitarian aid to the local population.
What are the main obstacles to UN action today? Is this a structural problem linked to its organization or a reflection of geopolitical tensions between democracies and autocracies, and between the North and the South?
It would be easy to say that the difficulties encountered are a simple reflection of current geopolitical tensions. But this dimension undeniably exists: our world is increasingly moving towards a multipolar dynamic, which creates turbulence and complicates the resolution of conflicts.
But the United Nations must also question its own functioning and lucidly examine what is not working. Some of the major elements of the architecture of the United Nations, such as the composition and decision-making method of the Security Council, are based on the geopolitics of 1945. They do not reflect the reality of power relations today. . This must be changed.
Should the Security Council be expanded to include new members, as France in particular wishes?
There has been talk of reforming the UN Security Council for a long time. But it is now more necessary than ever to do so. And I see that the debate has taken on a new dimension. The five permanent members of the Security Council have spoken of the need to reform it. American President Joe Biden notably expressed himself along these lines at the last two general assemblies of the United Nations.
It’s relatively new and it gives us a little hope, even if we are far from seeing the end of the tunnel. There are points of convergence: several States consider that Africa must be represented, for example. But if everyone agrees on the need for reform, let’s be honest, that does not mean that everyone agrees on what this reform should be.
Emerging countries are calling for reform of international financial institutions: is progress possible?
Developing countries are indeed awaiting this essential reform. But she faces resistance. However, it is in the interest of the World Bank and the IMF to tackle this, because the credibility and sustainability of the entire system are at stake. We have proposed a range of actions ranging from governance processes within financial institutions to issues relating to liquidity and special drawing rights [NDLR : unité de compte du FMI]. They also address the issue of debt treatment. Alarmingly, many countries in the developing world spend more on debt servicing than they spend on health or education. Despite the undeniable blockages, there is a growing political awareness that things must move.
Concerning peacekeeping missions, do you think that the UN should be refocused on a more limited number of missions?
The experiences we have had in Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan demonstrate that we must ask ourselves whether our current toolbox of peacekeeping operations is still suitable. It is absurd to have peacekeeping operations where there is no peace to keep… There is no chance that it will work.
The Secretary General proposed a “new agenda for peace”, a range of actions ranging from addressing root causes, to mediation operations, including peacekeeping, conflict resolution and reconstruction. We will also strengthen cooperation with regional organizations, such as the African Union. We hope that this very innovative approach will make our peacekeeping operations more effective.
Could strengthening the role of the secretary-general make the UN more effective?
The general secretary has neither power nor money. But he has a voice, to defend a set of principles, and objectives that he has the responsibility to advance. I am not sure that we should give more powers to the secretary general. What we need is greater commitment from our Member States to the principles of the United Nations Charter, to the practice of multilateralism, to respect for the rule of law. When violations of international law are committed with impunity, we subvert and weaken the fundamental mission of the United Nations.
What do you expect from the Summit for the Future, which you are organizing in September in New York?
The idea of the Future Summit is to make multilateralism stronger and more effective. And the United Nations better adapted to the reality of the world. We must face new challenges, such as the speed of transformations linked to new technologies, and in particular artificial intelligence. We are currently examining the role that the United Nations could play in this area, through a high-level advisory council.
When it comes to maintaining peace and security, our toolbox is not effective enough. We must also take into account new risks, such as cyber attacks, the application of artificial intelligence in war (lethal autonomous weapons), or conflicts in space.
Our pact for the future will have five chapters: sustainable development; international peace and security; science, technology and innovation (to avoid a widening digital divide); youth (how to better involve them in decisions); and UN governance issues.
To remain credible, the United Nations must obtain results on its three traditional missions: human rights, development and security. In particular, we must implement the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. And unfortunately, we are off to a very bad start: halfway through this agenda, only 15% of the objectives were on track to be achieved. There is still time to correct the situation.
.