Model United Nations: solving the world's problems together
One of the most inspiring aspects of being at the UN, whether it’s in New York, Geneva, or here in The Hague is that the whole wide world is represented on a few square miles. This allows for easy interaction with people from all corners of the globe. A truly enriching experience that adds to one’s sense of idealism. I hope that you will have a similar experience in the days ahead, and that you will find that cooperation between nations is the only way in which the challenges of the 21st century can be met – even though achieving such cooperation can be a challenge in itself - even frustrating at times.
Gelegenheid: European International Model United Nations (TEIMUN)
Ladies and gentlemen,
Good afternoon! It’s a great pleasure to be here. It almost feels as if I’m in New York addressing the United Nations General Assembly: representatives from sixty countries have travelled to The Hague to attend this European International Model United Nations. That’s an impressive number! And there is a good regional spread as well – I am sure this will make for interesting times and a great atmosphere. One of the most inspiring aspects of being at the UN, whether it’s in New York, Geneva, or here in The Hague – which happens to be one of the biggest UN cities of the world – is that the whole wide world is represented on a few square miles. This allows for easy interaction with people from all corners of the globe. A truly enriching experience that adds to one’s sense of idealism. I hope that you will have a similar experience in the days ahead, and that you will find that cooperation between nations is the only way in which the challenges of the 21st century can be met – even though achieving such cooperation can be a challenge in itself - even frustrating at times. Something you will no doubt also experience.
The need for international cooperation
And yet there is no other way. The need for international cooperation has never been greater. The issues facing us are serious. Climate change. International terrorism. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear technology and nuclear material. Pandemics. The financial and economic crisis. These challenges have one thing in common. They all transcend national boundaries. They are all offshoots of the same process of globalization. No country in the world is immune. And no country in the world can solve these problems single-handedly. We all need each other to come up with workable solutions. This is precisely why you are here! Globalization demands international cooperation and collective action. It is a process that we will have to manage together, with a view to maximizing the benefits to the global community, and minimizing the drawbacks.
To make the world a safer and more equitable place, we need an international order. That multilateral system, based on legal principles that apply to all people and all nations, is designed to impose order and to prevent or resolve conflict and chaos. It is in our interest that the leading players on the world stage commit themselves to that system and its rules. A world where everyone acted like a responsible stakeholder and worked within international frameworks would be a better place for all. Accordingly, Dutch foreign policy aims to bind as many countries as possible to the international structure, based on rules and universal values.
Ladies and gentlemen,
As you are about to experience, international cooperation does not come about by itself. It is difficult to get countries to work together in the common interest. This has always been the case in the past, and it remains so today. In fact, it may be even more difficult in today’s fast changing world. The balance of power is shifting, in a markedly eastern direction. Not long from now, three of the five largest economies in the world will be in Asia: China, India and Japan. And we’re not just talking about economic power blocks: the new powers are also demanding a greater political and military role. This has consequences for this part of the world too: if the global seating plan is rearranged, the West will necessarily shift towards the edge – we can’t all sit in the middle. Such a rise and fall of powers is also causing a change in the prevailing worldview. In such circumstances, the scope for successful international cooperation seems limited, because of diverging national interests and differing views on universal values. Flawed institutions also stand in the way of successful international cooperation.
Is the UN 21st-century proof?
We need to ask ourselves whether the mechanisms designed to give shape to international cooperation are still 21st century proof. Is the United Nations still up to the task in this day and age? New players are demanding a bigger role on the world stage, and understandably so. The composition of the most important body that pronounces on matters of peace and security – the UN Security Council – is still based on the balance of power that existed in the aftermath of the Second World War. But the world has moved on. Even less appropriate is the idea that the president of the World Bank must be an American, and that of the IMF must be a European. Maybe that seemed a good idea in 1944 at Bretton Woods, but 65 years later the fastest growing economies are in Asia, which is completely excluded. China, the second largest economy in the world, has 3% of the voting rights in the IMF. Such arrangements are completely outdated! They undermine the legitimacy of our international order, which is widely seen as insufficiently representative.
Consequently, countries turn their back on the international system, because they can’t identify with it. This harms overall effectiveness and credibility. After all, the system is only as strong as the states that comprise it. When states renounce the system and try to withdraw from agreements they have made, the world becomes less safe and more unstable. Stability depends on order and rules.
A call for reform!
Because instability is not in anyone’s interest, we must mend the flaws in the international structure. The structure itself must be maintained: imperfect though it is, it’s the only platform we have. We must cherish it because it has done us a great deal of good; we must cherish it because there is no acceptable alternative. With the passage of time, the advent of globalisation and the tensions between countries, regions and religions, between North and South and between rich and poor, multilateralism has only become more relevant. The problems facing us today can only be solved with the participation of all stakeholders, that is, all the countries of the world. This is why it is so important that every stakeholder remain committed to the system.
Of course, giving the new powers a greater say in world affairs should also come at a price. They too, should take their responsibility and contribute according to their relative weight. That holds true for the Security Council: nations aspiring a seat in this body should also be willing to commit troops to international peacekeeping missions, for example. And it holds true for the IMF and World Bank: a greater say in the decision making process of the international financial institutions should imply that countries are willing to play an active role for example when it comes to providing soft loans. No representation without taxation.
What should change, then? I believe it is absolutely necessary that the United Nations reform, so that it can meet present-day challenges. Without adapting, the UN is bound to lose its global legitimacy. The rise of the G20 has acted as a wake up call in this respect. For years this body led something of a dormant existence, as a forum for finance ministers. But look at what it’s now become: thanks to the financial crisis, the authority of the G20 is now many times greater. Today, this is where new policy is formulated, where new plans are forged. Of course, an important reason for this is the advantages that the G20 has over other similar bodies. Its members are more regionally diverse than the members of the G8. This makes the G20 not only more inclusive, but also more legitimate. Yet at the same time, it is small enough to make bold moves. It doesn’t get bogged down in the endless reading of declarations you so often see in the UN. I think the G20 could become a great example of a new form of international cooperation. A new partnership that acts as a gateway to the UN.
In order to understand what kind of reform is necessary, it is useful to make a distinction between the UN’s three functions. First of all, the United Nations is the world’s moral authority. This is the place where standard setting takes place, resulting in Treaties, Conventions and resolutions. The Secretary General is the personification of the UN’s moral authority: he is there to guide the Charter’s principles. Secondly, the UN is a platform. A place where countries can meet to discuss a broad range of issues, and where they can “combine their efforts”, as the Charter says. Much like this meeting today. The UN as a convening power. And last but not least, the UN is a supplier of goods and services. Through its various agencies, the UN engages in development, education, health, sanitation, empowerment, emergency relief, biodiversity, environmental protection, you name it. Its peacekeeping missions are one of the most tangible deliverables of the organisation: the peacekeeping budget is three times as high as the UN’s regular budget.
Reforms, I believe, should focus on the last two functions: the UN as a convening power and the UN as a supplier of goods and services. The foundations of the house are still strong, but the seats at the table need to be re-arranged, allowing for better representation, and the floor plan must be upgraded, which will allow for a more efficient use of space.
Ladies and gentlemen,
This is exactly what is happening in New York at the moment. The UN’s Headquarters at the East River are being renovated. The building did not meet present day demands any longer. It’s now under reconstruction, and within the next five years, we expect to see a refurbished, shiny new UN. Our thinking on reform should keep track with the physical renovation. That means that within the next five years, the international community will have to come together on important issues such as Security Council reform. It’s been debated for a long time, without making any progress. Now is the time to move on. If we cannot agree on an immediate major overhaul, we must decide on incremental steps, a temporary arrangement, increasing the permanent membership step by step, allowing regions that are now underrepresented a greater say. Such a temporary arrangement can be reviewed after a certain amount of time, allowing for further refinements. If we do nothing, if we sit still, we can be certain that eventually, the foundation of our international structure will be affected, and the building will collapse. Without legitimacy, the moral authority of the UN will be at risk. This is not a desirable situation, and therefore, we must act.
Ladies and gentlemen,
You are here to act. Like Kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary General, once said:
“More than ever before in human history, we share a common destiny. We can master it only if we face it together. And that, my friends, is why we have the United Nations.”
You are here to prove him right!
Good luck in this Model United Nations, and remember: it’s not about the best team winning, it’s about the world as a whole winning!
Thank you.