| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Regionalism v. Universalism
II. Regionalism within the United Nations
The structures and processes of the United Nations have over the years developed much stronger regionalist features than the occasional references to geography in the Charter would suggest. Group dynamics, often of a regional character, have been among the most characteristic features of United Nations activity. In particular, the General Assembly and other plenary bodies have developed a highly elaborate group system, which has become a dominant feature of decision-making. These groupings have strongly regional features although political coherence also plays an important role.4 The composition of the group may be determined primarily by geographical location and cultural bonds (Africa, Latin America) or through membership in a regional organization (European Union).
These groupings play an important role in structuring and streamlining the work of these bodies. Often, common positions are developed within the group and then presented and explained on behalf of all its Members. In the preparation of elections, agreed candidates are presented. Solidarity and voting discipline is often surprisingly high and is evidently based on the realization that group loyalty is an indispensable prerequisite for effective power structures, even if it is at the cost of short-term national interests. Negotiating groups between these caucuses often settle questions before they reach the plenary.
The significance and style of inter-regional cooperation has undergone certain changes in the history of the United Nations. During its first phase, the United Nations was still strongly dominated by the group of northern industrialized States and their allies. Decolonization and the dramatic increase in membership, especially in the 1960s, has not only led to a strengthening of the groups of African and Asian States but also to a newly discovered self-confidence of Members from these `new regions'. A determined use of numerical majorities during this second phase led to a climate of confrontation, which reached its apex in the 1970s and is epitomized by resolutions purporting to herald a new international economic order. A third phase commencing in the late 1980s has seen the introduction of a much more cooperative and conciliatory climate, which has been strengthened by the near disappearance of the communist bloc.
Regional cooperation has been formalized in most elections and appointments. In the General Assembly, the election of the President, of the Vice-Presidents and of the Chairs of the Main Committees follows a carefully balanced regional pattern.5
In the Security Council, the 10 non-permanent seats are allocated to specific regions.6 In the current debate about a new structure for the Security Council, there are not only demands for a better representation of certain regions but even suggestions to create genuine permanent or semi-permanent regional seats.7
Similarly, the composition of the ECOSOC is determined by a roster of countries organized by regional groups.8
Regional considerations were even extended to organs whose members do not represent States but are elected in their individual capacity. It is accepted that the composition of the International Court of Justice should generally mirror the geographical composition of the Security Council. The International Law Commission, which under Article 8 of its Statute is to reflect the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world, is also composed according to a strict regional pattern.9
In the Secretariat, the problem of equitable geographical distribution has become the dominant factor for appointments. Desirable national ranges have been established for every Member on the basis of financial contribution, membership and population. Regional considerations also frequently play a role with certain positions rotating among nationals of Members belonging to a certain group.10
The creation of genuine regional substructures has not been a prominent feature in the United Nations. The five Regional Economic Commissions set up by ECOSOC are exceptional in this respect. They work relatively independently and are regarded as generally successful.11 A number of Specialized Agencies have regional offices and/or field units. UNDP has regional representatives and field offices.
Regionalization within the United Nations has clearly served some useful purposes. Political groupings can play an important and beneficial role in any democratic decision-making process. They add efficiency and structure to the complex process of communication, thereby facilitating compromise. Regional distribution of seats in political organs reduces the potential for conflict in the selection of Members and gives all groups a more secure sense of representation.
In an organization the size of the United Nations, groupings of Members are almost certain to continue to play an important role. What is less certain, is whether clustering will continue to be dominated by geography. To the extent that political orientation and economic development transcend geographical regions, new group loyalties will begin to emerge. For instance, Africa held together by its colonial past and by widespread poverty may lose its coherence and may, one day, look more like Asia with its infinitely more diverse political and economic landscape. A flexible response of the United Nations system to these anticipated changes will be decisive for maintaining its smooth functioning.
In non-political organs such as the International Court of Justice, the International Law Commission but also the Secretariat, any benefit of regional distribution of positions is less obvious. Regionalization may simplify the selection process but will frequently be at the expense of personal qualification. The representation of different legal cultures is, no doubt, a valuable element. Nevertheless, rigid regional quotas are neither necessary nor helpful. This criticism applies with particular force to the Secretariat where the primacy of merit over geographical considerations, as provided for by Article 101(3) of the Charter, should be restored.
4 See Bennigsen, `Block- und Gruppenbildung' and Schreuer, `Regionalisierung', in R. Wolfrum (ed.), Handbuch Vereinte Nationen (1991) 62, 679.
5 G.A. Res. 1990(XVIII), G.A. Res. 33/138.
7 Sucharipa-Behrmann, `The Enlargement of the UN Security Council. The Question of Equitable Representation of and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council', 47 AJPIL (1994) 1.
8 G.A. Res. 1991B(XVIII) and 2847(XXVI).
10 The General Assembly has repeatedly criticized this practice. See, e.g., G.A. Res. 45/239, 46/232, 47/226.
11 Szasz, Willisch, `Regional Commissions of the United Nations', 6 EPIL (1983) 296. Cf. also G.A. Res. 32/197 Annex paras. 19-27. There are plans for a strengthening of the Regional Commissions, see, e.g., G.A. Res. 46/235 and 47/212.
© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part
of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European
Law at the European University
Institute.
This file was last modified:
Saturday, August 14, 1999 01:53PM