What’s new in Washington’s relationship with the international organisation? Hassan Nafaa* seeks some answers
The opening of the annual session of the UN General Assembly no longer stirs much interest. Were it not for the meetings held on the fringes by controversial leaders, or the behind-the-scenes mediation undertaken by heads of state seeking a solution to some crisis or other, the occasion would probably pass unnoticed by the general public. This year’s inaugural session was an exception. What lent it a unique flavour was the presence of US President Barack Obama. Less than a year ago Obama was voted into power as the US’s 44th president on the basis of a campaign that championed change. The international community is now keen to learn what type of change he will bring to US foreign policy and, in particular, to Washington’s relations with the UN which had reached an all-time low under his predecessor.
The inauguration of the UN’s new session witnessed two events that reflected some of the nature of this change. The first was Obama’s address to the General Assembly, very different in tone and substance from what that international gathering is used to hearing from US presidents. The second was the Security Council session, headed personally by Obama, dedicated to the discussion of a draft resolution on the prevention of the proliferation of nuclear weapons, envisioned as a first step towards creating a world free of nuclear weapons. As this was the first time a US president had ever chaired a Security Council session, the event was of undeniable symbolic and material significance. Many felt that the US had truly turned a new page in the history of its relations with the UN. But what does Obama intend to write on this page?
Perhaps the best approach to answering this question is to examine Washington’s changing relationship with the international organisation in a kind of historical flashback:
The first scene opens in the aftermath of World War I, which the US was compelled to enter in spite of the isolationist policy it had adhered to since the outset of the 19th century. The protagonist, here, is president Woodrow Wilson who, at the Versailles peace conference, personally spearheaded the creation of the first international organisation concerned with the preservation of international peace and security. Wilson was not only the most enthusiastic cheerleader for the League of Nations, he was also the most instrumental in shaping the nascent organisation’s charter. Wilson headed the committee responsible for drafting it. However, this scene closes on a sad note. Wilson soon discovered that his vision was beyond the comprehension of the general run of American opinion. Congress refused to ratify the treaty, preventing the US from joining the League of Nations, which was one of the primary causes for that organisation’s frailty and eventual collapse.
* The writer is professor of political science at Cairo University.