12 April 2003
Merits of Moving the UN HQ to Baghdad
- / -
A very strong case has been made by Simon Jenkins to Keep
the UN well away from Iraq - for now (The Times, 9 April 2003).
That argument focuses on immediate humanitarian intervention and nation-building
programmes. There is however a medium-term argument with respect to the
relocation of the UN Secretariat itself -- an operation that extends far beyond
the time horizon addressed by Simon Jenkins and is relevant to current issues
of renovating the existing UN Secretariat building already constrained for space.
The following points would appear to strongly justify active planning for such
a move to Baghdad at this time:
- It would constitute a concrete manifestation of the vital role that the
UN could in future perform in relation to the Iraqi economy, if only through
the external resources associated with maintaining the Secretariat and the
benefits to the local economy from visiting delegates
- In a time of great stress, suspicion and uncertainty, it would constitute
a visible manifestation of the concrete commitment to the challenges of the
Middle East and the regional peace process
- It would shift the centre of gravity of the international community from
the North and help to provide a bridging function to the impoverished populations
of Africa and Asia
- For the most representative body of "We the Peoples...", Baghdad and
the Tigris-Euphrates region is a natural symbolic location, embodying a deep
cultural heritage as the cradle of human civilization
- It would help focus the reconstruction of Iraq and prevent the conflict
from becoming a long-lasting symbol of the failures of the international community
and the UN itself
- It would creatively position the UN in relation to nation-building in the
post-Saddam era in Iraq and offer a stablizing focus for the Middle East
- It would provide a catalytic role for new thinking in the Arab world
- It would reduce the infrastructure costs of a UN administration already
faced with budgetary challenges at its current location in New York
- The many costly public buildings and complexes constructed by the Saddam
regime in Baghdad should offer many possibilities for a UN Secretariat, which
might even benefit significantly from a lateral rather than vertical disposition
of offices, especially when interspersed by gardens; their use by the UN would
help to justify the resources devoted to such sumptuous buildings
- It would shift the UN from a country whose government has publicly expressed
little regard for it, and has no need of it, to a region where its potential
can be more effectively explored through other cultural frameworks
- The possibilities of participation in UN processes from the South, and from
transition countries, would be increased by the shift in geographic location,
which would also reduce the travel expenses for many
- It would require the UN to adopt a more networked organizational style,
more in keeping with the requirements of the 21st century
- It would constitute a real challenge to those Secretariat personnel who
may have become overly habituated to the comforts of the Manhattan setting
and a "developed-world" mindset
- It would increase the representativity at UN meetings, notably of civil
society bodies from the South, especially by reducing the air travel security
constraints requiring invasive body searching of suspects on entry to the
USA
- It would reduce the strain on the security systems of the USA currently
faced with the challenge of so many dubious visitors from countries acknowledged
to be hotbeds of terrorist sympathizers
- It would offer a construction opportunity to multinational corporations
desiring to contribute prestigiously to participation in the Iraqi nation-building
process, and perhaps frustrated by the priority given to contractors from
countries more closely associated with the USA
- At a time when the reputation and role of the UN is being called into question,
such a move would position the UN more centrally and visibly in relation to
the challenges of a developing world that still looks to it for hope
- It would reduce the security threat to UN delegates and personel, given
the authoritative indications of US intelligence agencies, that the USA (and
New York in particular) is under increasing threat of terrorist attack
- The Secretariat building is in need of major renovation and is severely
constrained for space, notably to house civil society bodies (see below).
It is also a major cause of traffic problems in New York City. The UN's Capital
Master Plan could usefully envisage construction of a new complex in Baghdad
rather than having to envisage alternative space whilst renovation takes place.
Any more arguments....?
Earlier proposals
Earlier proposals have been most recently brought to a focus by the state of
the UN Secretariat building and the traffic issues that the presence of that
building creates in Manhattan. Other proposals have been put forward as a result
of the negligence of the USA with respect to its membership arrears. Clearly
there are wider concerns with respect to the questionable degree of association
with the USA as it takes on its role of sole superpower and sets aside major
international treaty provisions that the UN has struggled so hard to articulate.
Recent items relating to such proposals include:
2002: Under the co-chairmanship of Lawrence C. Moss, the Association of the
Bar of the City of New York produced an excellent, multi-facetted and wellm-documented
report discussing the challenges of the UN Secretariat building in relation
to the UN's Capital Master Plan (New
York City and the United Nations: Towards a Renewed Relationship: A
Report by the Special Committee on the United Nations of the Association of
the Bar of the City of New York). The report notes:
- A team of architects and engineers thoroughly examined the condition of
the UN headquarters complex in 1998-99. The study concluded that despite the
high quality of the original construction, many building elements had deteriorated
due to age, or do not meet current standards for safety and energy efficiency.
The study concluded "the current condition of the Headquarters complex renders
it unacceptable for continued use over the long term."
- The Secretariat further considered demolishing and rebuilding the headquarters
complex. Using the present site, this would cost several hundred million dollars
more than renovation, and would be highly disruptive to the UN. Reconstruction
of the UN on Governor's Island has also been suggested, bringing considerable
security and traffic advantages,
- In summary, the UN General Assembly is likely to choose, and the City should
support, a plan for the UN to thoroughly renovate its present headquarters
complex over a number of years. The primary consequences for the City will
be the need to accommodate the UN's need for "swing space" to relocate meetings
and staff during renovation work, to make improvements to nearby roads, and
to assist with financing the renovation.
- One space need not considered by the UN's Capital Master Plan is for additional
office space to house nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Consultative status
for NGO's is provided for in Article 71 of the United Nations Charter, and
the number of accredited NGOs has steadily increased. Currently there are
2091 NGOs in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC),
some 400 NGOs accredited to the Commission on Sustainable Development, a subsidiary
body of ECOSOC, and 1,672 NGO's are registered with the UN Department of Public
Information. [55] The City may want to encourage the growth of NGO's, both
for economic development purposes, and to enrich the processes of the UN,
and a new facility would help. A building constructed by UNDC as swing space
for the UN during renovation might later be leased to NGO's. Another imaginative
idea to explore is construction of a new conference hall for meetings and
conferences during renovation of the UN headquarters, and later using the
space as a cultural venue and/or as a location for the fall general debate
if the new location affords easier high-security access for Heads of State.
[more]
2001: St Petersburg: Dmitrii Rogozin, the chairman of the Duma International
Relations Committee, told Interfax on 14 May that Moscow may propose moving
the headquarters of the United Nations from New York to St. Petersburg because
of America's failure to pay its dues. "If the position of the Americans does
not change and if as a result the international civil servants working in New
York feel ever more uncomfortable, I think we will raise the question of moving
the central UN headquarters to the 'Venice of the North,' St. Petersburg," Rogozin
said. [more]
2001: A US telephone poll concluded that 67% of callers were in favour of moving
the UN out of the USA.
1997: Continuing friction between the United Nations and New York City has
focused on the issue of parking. Tough enforcement programmes in relation
to the many abuses of diplomatic privilege over parking resulted in one French
legal expert recommending that the Secretariat be moved out of New York.
|
