Parliamentary Assembly
Assemblée parlementaire

Strengthening of the United Nations

Doc. 10120
31 March 2004

Report
Political Affairs Committee
Rapporteur : Mrs Tana de Zulueta, Italy, Socialist Group

Summary

The Parliamentary Assembly has a long history of constant support for the United Nations. The events which took place in the run-up to the Iraq war, namely the occupation of a sovereign state without prior authorisation by the Security Council, undermined the confidence in a multilateral system. The Parliamentary Assembly continues to be committed to multilateralism and to a collective response to global threats. It is convinced more than ever that a multilateral system founded on the United Nations and its Charter is the only way to meet the complexity of today’s challenges.

The Assembly gives its backing to the strengthening of the United Nations, the world body of which its members feel a full part. It underlines the necessity for the United Nations to maintain its capacity to adapt to new challenges while remaining faithful to the purposes and the principles laid down in its Charter. It welcomes the forward-looking attitude of the United Nations’ Secretary-General and his readiness to cast a critical eye on his Organisation in an urge to adapt better to today’s world.

As regards concrete measures, the Assembly urges inter alia the Council of Europe members which are permanent members of the Security Council to take the lead by showing flexibility as regards Security Council reform in order to break the current deadlock. It also calls for a mechanism for more efficient implementation of the Security Council’s resolutions.

The UN General Assembly lacks at present political leverage and the Parliamentary Assembly proposes that the authority of the President of the General Assembly be enhanced by extending his/her mandate to three years and to consider electing a political figure to this post. It also reiterates its previous calls to introduce a parliamentary dimension in the work of the General Assembly. Ith this aim in mind, national delegations could include parliamentarians endowed with the possibility to participate actively in the work of the General Assembly and a parliamentary network to discuss major political issues related to the United Nations could be set up.

The Assembly also proposes to make the election of the chairpersons  in the Organisation’s principal committees by member states conditional on the candidate’s national government having ratified and implemented the United Nations covenants for the protection of human rights. 

I.          Draft Resolution [Link to the adopted text]

1.                  The Parliamentary Assembly has a long history of constant support for the United Nations. It recalls its Resolution 1351 (2003) on the Role of the United Nations in Iraq in which it calls unilateral action a fundamental challenge to the principles of collective security and the United Nations Charter.  Likewise, its previous recommendations concerning the United Nations (Reform of the United Nations 1367 (1998), Relations with the United Nations 1411 (1999) and The United Nations at the turn of the new century 1476 (2000)) call for an enhanced role of that Organisation.

2.                  The Assembly continues to give its full backing to the strengthening of the United Nations, the world body of which its members feel fully part. It underlines the necessity for the United Nations to maintain its capacity to adapt to new challenges while remaining faithful to the purposes and the principles laid down in its Charter.

3.                  The Assembly welcomes the forward-looking attitude of the United Nations Secretary- General, Kofi Annan, and his readiness to cast a critical eye on his Organisation in an urge to adapt it better to the requirements of today’s world.  It gives its full backing to the work of the High-Level Panel on Global Threats, Challenges and Change set up by the Secretary-General in November 2003.

4.                  The year 2003 has been a difficult one for the United Nations and for those who believe in collective responses to global challenges. Confidence in the multilateral system has been undermined by the war in Iraq, the occupation of a sovereign state without prior authorisation by the Security Council. Nonetheless, the ongoing violence in Iraq and the difficulties faced by the US-lead military occupation in the planned transfer of sovereignty to Iraqis have prompted widespread calls for a central UN role in this crucial phase.

5.                  The Assembly is committed to multilateralism and to a collective response to global threats. It is convinced more than ever that a multilateral system founded on the United Nations and its Charter is the only way to meet the complexity of today’s challenges, be they “soft” or “hard” threats, or old or new in nature.

6.                  As regards institutional reform, the Assembly agrees on the need for reform of the Security Council but urges a broader approach in order to give due weight to the other departments and agencies of the Organisation, in accordance with the spirit of the Charter.

7.                  In order to increase its legitimacy, the Security Council must be made more representative of the United Nations’ membership.  At present, the membership of the Security Council reflects the post-war world order which held sway when it was firstformed.

8.                  While the transparency of working procedures has been improved, decision-making in the Security Council must be rendered more effective in order to convince its members of its efficacy. The current veto system needs to be modified. The Assembly supports the proposal of the European Parliament to replace it by a system of “double veto” (veto only relevant if used by two permanent members) and only in the cases referred to in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter (threats to peace, breaches of peace and acts of aggression). The Security Council must find mechanisms for more effective implementation of its resolutions.

9.                  The Council of Europe member states which are permanent members of the Security Council, France, Russia and the United Kingdom, should take the lead by showing flexibility as regards  Security Council reform in order to break the current deadlock.

10.               The Assembly takes note of the General Assembly Resolution Revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly (A/RES/58/126) and welcomes the efforts by the President of the General Assembly to restore the Assembly's intended role as the premier decision-making and political body of the United Nations.

11.               The Assembly considers, however, that a genuine revitalisation necessitates not just new rules and procedures to improve efficiency but also the introduction of a parliamentary dimension to the work of the General Assembly, at times called “the parliament of man”. The parliamentary dimension could also addto improving the follow-up at the national level to various United Nations’ conferences and summits.

12.               The Assembly notes the European Parliament Resolution on the Relations between the European Union and the United Nations (2049-29.1.04) and it welcomes the proposal contained in it to jointly launch, with regional and world parliamentary assemblies, a network of parliamentarians to discuss major political issues related to the United Nations’ activity and the challenges it faces.

13.       Globalization has had a highly uneven impact on the economies and the societies of member states while it has failed to bring economic benefits to all. There is therefore an urgent need for the United Nations to promote a fairer and better global economic order. To this end the Assembly supports proposals to set up at the United Nations an Economic and Social Security Council, thus providing itself with a politically legitimate platform to discuss global economic and social problems.

14.       The Assembly encourages the United Nations Secretary-General to make full use of the expertise of regional organisations, such as the Council of Europe, in addressing global threats and in implementing the United Nations’ various programmes and activities. The Council of Europe’s experience in specific areas, such as building democratic security and stability, its activities in the promotion and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, confidence-building measures, protection of national minorities, promoting equal opportunities between women and men,the fight against racism and protection of the environmentcan only strengthen and complement the United Nations’ response to the global threats. 

15.               The Assembly calls on the governments of the Council of Europe member and observer states:

i.          as regards the United Nations General Assembly to:

a.       give their full support to the General Assembly Resolution on Revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly (A/RES/58/126) and do their utmost to implement its provisions;

b.       make proposals to enhance the authority of the President of the General Assembly by extending her/his mandate to 3 years and to consider electing a political figure to this post in order to give the General Assembly more political leverage;

c.      include parliamentarians in their national delegation and endow them with the possibility to participate actively in the work of the General Assembly;

ii.         as regards the Security Council: to adopt a genuinely constructive attitude towards making the Security Council more representative of the United Nations’ member states, as well as in making its decision-making more effective;

iii.         as regards the United Nations’ agencies: to contribute to assuring long-term financial viability for the United Nations’ agencies;

iv.         as regards the United Nations’ relations with the Bretton Woods  Institutions: to improve the role the United Nations play in global financial decisions by setting up at the United Nations an Economic and Social Security Council;

v.          as regards the goals set by the Millennium Declaration: to honour the commitments they made in the year 2000 by providing the necessary financial resources for implementing the goals set by the Millennium Declaration;

vi.         to make the election ofthe chairpersons of the Organisation's principal committees by member states conditional on the candidate’s national government having ratified and implemented the United Nations covenants for the protection of human rights. 

II.         Draft Recommendation [Link to the adopted text]

1.                  The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution …. (2004) on the Strengthening of the United Nations.

2.                  It recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

i.          be active in preparing a common Council of Europe position in the General Assembly on issues that are of direct concern to the Council of Europe;

ii.         consult at an early stage the Parliamentary Assembly on the preparation of the biannual debate in the General Assembly and draft resolution on the Co-operation between the United Nations and the Council of Europe;

iii.                 illustrate the Council of Europe’s readiness to actively contribute to implementing United Nations’ programmes and activities in which it has known expertise;

iv.         encourage the governments of the Council of Europe member and observer states to include members of the Parliamentary Assembly in their delegations to the General Assembly for the purpose of the biannual debate on Co-operation between the United Nations and the Council of Europe and to enable these members of the Parliamentary Assembly to take part in this debate;

v.          make concrete proposals as regards a permanent presence of the Council of Europe at the United Nations Headquarters;

vi.         put at the disposal of the United Nations the expertise of the Council of Europe in the field of implementation of international legal instruments and their follow-up mechanism;

vii.                 devote a special meeting of the Ministers’ Deputes to prepare the implementation of the above-mentioned paragraphs with the participation of the representatives of the observer states and the Parliamentary Assembly.

III.        Explanatory memorandum

I.                    Introduction

1.         The Parliamentary Assembly has a long history of constant support for the United Nations. Its most recent texts on The reform of the United Nations, Relations with the United Nations, The United Nations at the turn of the new century and The role of the United Nations in Iraq [1]not only pay tribute to the work of the United Nations in various fields, but also show its support for strengthening the multilateralism embodied in the world Organisation by adapting it to the requirements of its member states today. The present report is a follow-up to a motion (Doc. 9780) which was mainly provoked by the events of “9/11” and other acts of terrorism, as well as the conflicts in Iraq and the Middle East.

2.         The Council of Europe itself, upon recommendations by the Parliamentary Assembly, has clarified and intensified its relationship with the United Nations. Since 2001 the General Assembly holds a debate and adopts a resolution on co-operation between the two Organisations. On the occasion of this biannual debate, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and some members of the Sub-Committee on the Relations with Non-Member Countries address the General Assembly. Furthermore, on that same occasion the Sub-Committee the Relations with Non-Member Countries holds meetings at the United Nations Headquarters with senior UN officials. Also, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe participates in the High-Level meetings between the United Nations and regional organisations.

3.         Today, the Parliamentary Assembly’s support for strengthening the United Nations is stronger than before. The events which took place in the run-up to the Iraq war, namely the use of force without prior authorisation by the  Security Council, set a fundamental challenge to the United Nation’s founding principles of collective security and to the principles laid down in its Charter. The events furthermore underlined the need for the urgent reform of the United Nations. This view is shared not only by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, but by the member States of the United Nations. This was made amply clear in the opening speeches of the heads of State and government at the 58th General Assembly. The United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, said that the Organisation had come to “a fork in the road” and that “this moment was no less decisive than 1945 itself, when the United Nations was founded”. I can but welcome the Secretary-General’s forward-looking attitude and readiness to cast a critical eye at his Organization in an urge to adapt it better to the requirements of today’s world.

4.         I am equally pleased to note the European Parliament Resolution on The relations between the European Union and the United Nations Organisation (adopted on 29 January 2004),  which is fully in line with the Assembly’s previous reports as regards multilateralism and the role of the United Nations in today’s world. Furthermore, it makes proposals concerning parliamentary input in the work of the United Nations, improvement that the Parliamentary Assembly has argued for over several years.

5.         I should like to point out that if I use the word reform in my text, I use it in a positive sense with an aim to strengthen the Organisation on the scene of world politics and realigning and revitalizing its principle organs.  

II.                  Time for fundamental reassessment and today’s global threats and challenges

6.         Since its creation in 1945 and at the time its Charter was written, the membership of the United Nations has grown from 51 to 191 members. This expansion in membership together with the changes in world politics has reinforced the need for a fundamental reassessment. The organisation of the United Nations and the Security Council in particular reflect the balance of political power after the second World War.  Also, today’s membership includes several countries which did not exist at the time of the creation of the United Nations.

7.         Moreover, the Charter does not address a number of dangers and threats it’s member States, including the Council of Europe member States, are faced with today. Today, as the UN Secretary-General himself has pointed out, the main challenges to our security are threats which defy borders, varying from “hard” threats such as terrorism and weapons of mass destruction to “soft” threats such as poverty, endemic diseases and environmental degradation.

8.         The war in Iraq, its prelude and its aftermath, have put the fundamental question of the principle and practice of the rule of law to the test: raising first and foremost the question of the use of force, and, by extension, the principle of the sovereignty of nations, as well as that of collective security. The resulting debate has put to the test the resilience of the United Nations.

9.         Kofi Annan has rightly said that “unilateralism is a recipe for anarchy”. The fact remains that at present a number of member states and some members of Mr Annan's own staff lament that the United Nations is not equipped to respond adequately to the threats and challenges its members states face.

10.       Kofi Annan announced in his speech to the General Assembly on 23 September 2003 his intention to set up a High-Level Panel on Global Threats, Challenges and Change. On 3 November 2003, he appointed the 16-members of this High-Level Panel. The Panel is “tasked with examining the major threats and challenges the world faces in the broad field of peace and security, including economic and social issues insofar as they relate to peace and security, and making recommendations for the elements of a collective response”. This Panel is chaired by Mr Anand Panyarachun, former Prime Minister of Thailand, list of the other members of the Panel appears and its terms of reference appear respectively in Appendix I and II.

11.       An Assembly delegation met with members of the High-Level Panel on 16 February 2004 in Paris (list of participants appears in Appendix III). This exchange of views proved mutually beneficial for both sides as it highlighted the role regional organisations, such as the Council of Europe, could play, not as autonomous actors, but in co-operation with the United Nations in responding to global threats and challenges. Participants noted that disproportionate attention is placed on “hard” threats (terrorism, weapons of mass destruction), although “soft” threats, notably poverty, pollution and infectious diseases lead to more civil casualties. Moreover, “soft” threats are often at the origin of “hard” threats.

12.       Participants also regretted that a military response has been used increasingly often to address non-military threats. They also pointed out that the major problem the United Nations has to face is that its international legal instruments are not efficiently implemented. As the Council of Europe has been successful in implementing its own legal instruments through monitoring the follow-up, it should put its expertise at the disposal of the United Nations.

III.                How to strengthen the United Nations: Questions under debate

13.       Most of the member States of the United Nations agree on the need to strengthen the United Nations. However, when it comes to designing what the nature of the future multilateral institution should be, its rules and instruments, there appears to be less consensus.  Some voices call for a more democratic, accountable and credible Organisation, others emphasise the need for a more effective and productive system. There are also voices arguing for a reform which would better serve the national interests of its respective member States.

14.       There have been several attempts to reform the United Nations in the past. Only one of these endeavours led to concrete changes: the increase of Security Council membership from eleven to fifteen in 1965. This increase was an unavoidable measure to reflect the first wave of decolonisation in Africa and Asia. Since 1945, the UN Charter has been amended three times and all of these changes involved increasing seat numbers one in the Security Council and twice in the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). The reform of the peace-keeping operations proposed by the Brahimi-report although important does not address the problem of prevention.

15.       I visited the United Nations Headquarters in New York on 8 and 9 December 2003 in the framework of preparing this report and met with a number of UN officials who gave me a valuable insight into questions which have been put on the table. Ambassador Mats Ĺberg, Permanent Representative of Sweden to the Council of Europe and Rapporteur of the Ministers’ Deputies on the United Nations, participated in this visit. I am grateful to see the support he has show for the Assembly’s work on this question and look forward for fruitful future co-operation. During these discussions one of my interlocutors told me that there are initiatives for Reform with a capital letter and reform with a small letter. Reform with a capital letter dealt with issues of a fundamental nature, such as how to face major challenges and threats, the reform of the Security Council and the General Assembly. Reform with small letter concerned rather internal organisation and prioritising activity, but its results did dovetail with the more global reforms.

a.         More representative and effective Security Council

16.       The Security Council is at the heart of the United Nations and its efficacy is a prerequisite for strengthening the United Nations. Reform is necessary to give it greater legitimacy in the eyes of its members while ensuring a genuine capacity to preserve the peace. Yet, it is certainly the most complicated body to reform. The present discussion on the number of members and the use of and/or expanding the right to veto may lead nowhere because of the P-5’s vested interest in preserving the status quo (no provision in the Charter requires them to relinquish this right). Increasing the membership to 25, would make the Security Council more representative and thus improve its legitimacy.

17.       To break the current deadlock, the Council of Europe member States which are members of the P-5 (France, Russia and the United Kingdom), and who share key political, economic and social values, as testified by their common membership of the Council of Europe and their adhesion to its main instruments and conventions, might take the lead by showing flexibility on the veto issue. The proposal of the European Parliament to replace the existing system by “double veto” (veto relevant only if used by two permanent members) and only in the cases referred to in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter (threats to peace, breaches of peace and acts of aggression) is an excellent one to move ahead on this issue that has been dragging on for far too long.

18.       Since the war in Iraq, the debate on the reform of the Security Council has shifted from more representative membership to how to restrain a superpower from taking unilateral action. The unresolved question at the heart of the debate is that of the use of military force without authorisation by the Security Council. In the present international setting, the United States has emerged as the only superpower and its military capacity is far greater than that of any other member state. Therefore, the United States’ military might allows it to act unilaterally if it so wishes, as the war in Iraq has proved. Moreover, the divisions among the European states about the future design and leadership of Europe does not help to counterbalance the United States.

19.       It is important to determine in which situations the United Nations member states should act in concert.  An agreed set of benchmarks should be set to allow members to determine under what conditions there could be a resort to force in circumstances which might not be precisely definable as self-defence. Clear criteria should be set as regards to what action can be undertaken in cases such as imminent genocide or against the development by a member state of weapons of mass destruction with a clear intention to use them in an aggressive manner .

20.               While the UN Charter remains the cornerstone of the international institutional architecture as well as providing the fundamental principles for the preservation of international peace and security, I believe that our Assembly should initiate a debate to examine a suggestion by the European Parliament (Resolution 2049 of 29.1.04) which proposes a mechanism to enable concerned member states to “circumvent” a single veto impeding action in the face of grave violations of human rights. Such action would be limited to cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, as defined by the Statute of the International Criminal Court. The European Parliament has suggested that in such cases there should be the possibility of recourse to an independent organ, such as the International Court of Justice or the International Criminal Court, which would rule on the commission of these crimes.

21.       The United Nations should be enabled to take measures to help members feel the benefit of a multilateral approach. There is no doubt that the United States, a founding member of the United Nations, and the fountainhead of the multilateral values at the heart of the Charter, should be encouraged to continue to feel part of the United Nations. What is wanting in political circles in the United States today, and particularly in the current Administration, is a general perception that working within a multilateral organisation brings added value. The United States’ participation, both political and financial, is an absolute prerequisite to strengthening the United Nations. Today the United States has made it clear it does not want to be part of an organisation which seeks to limit its power. Today our Assembly should attempt try to strengthen the perception in the United States that the United Nations can contribute to the enhancement of United States’ influence, to the extent that the United Nations, especially the Security Council, can increase the legitimacy of its action and help share global risks, for example, in the fight against international terrorism. On condition, however, that endeavours such as the fight against terrorism and the reconstruction of Iraq are undertaken within the framework of the UN Charter and its institutions, and in full compliance of current norms of humanitarian law.

22.       The present endeavour for reform ofthe Security Council has been on the table since 1993. The Open-Ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other Matters Related to the Security Council meets to discuss different proposals, so far without very concrete results. The main argument behind the need for a reform is that the choice of its five permanent members (P-5) reflects the post-war power structure that held sway when the Security Council was formed. The fact that the P-5, (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and the United States) have a veto right is considered undemocratic and allows them to dominate the rest of the Security Council. There seems to be consensus, at least rhetorically, that the membership should be made more representative by expanding it notably to include countries of the under-represented South and that its work should be better organised and more efficient. There is no agreement about who the new members should be, whether the new members should be permanent or non-permanent elected for a certain number of years. Furthermore, agreement is not in sight as regards the right to veto, i.e. whether the new permanent members should be endowed with a right to veto and whether right to veto should be limited to substantive issues only.

23.       The European Parliament calls for a permanent seat for the European Union on the Security Council as soon as its legal personality is recognised. This proposal is certainly a logical reflection of the European Union’s efforts to streamline its own institutions. However, I have doubts whether this seat can be added without withdrawing the existing permanent seats of France and the United Kingdom -- probably an unlikely act of self-sacrifice at this juncture.  A number of member states do believe, however, that this change would be a desirable pre-requisite to enlargement, on the grounds that today the industrialised countries are over-represented.

24.       The European Parliament also proposes to replace the current veto system with a “double veto”, i.e. a veto by a minimum of two permanent members which should only be used for issues covered by Chapter VII of the Charter (threats to peace, acts of aggression and violations of peace).

25.               In view of improving the Security Council’s efficiency, it is important to endow it with mechanism, which would allow it to efficiently implement its own resolutions. Many member states, regardless whether they are members of the Security Council or not, deplore the fact that so many resolutions are never followed up.

26.       As regards the working methods, there has certainly been some improvement in the past, mainly by introducing more openness in the deliberations of the Security Council. For example, the President of the Security Council regularly briefs non-members and the press about private consultations and the Security Council routinely holds consultations with senior UN officials.

b.         More political leverage for the General Assembly

27.       As regards the revitalisation of the General Assembly, the task may be less complicated than that of the Security Council. I can but repeat the previous calls to introduce a parliamentary dimension to its work. This can be done, for example, by increasing the active participation of parliamentarians in national delegations. They should be included as parliamentarians and not as “experts/advisors”. Furthermore, they should be allowed to speak in the General Assembly. In the past, during debates on co-operation between the United Nations and the Council of Europe, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom allowed members of the Sub-Committee on Relations with Non-Member Countries to address the General Assembly. Further participation would no doubt increase legitimacy of the General Assembly’s work, follow-up of its resolutions by the national parliaments and it would also provide a “parliamentary scrutiny” and democratic accountability of the member states respect of various United Nations texts. They could, for example, pressure better their governments to help in reducing the gap between rhetoric and action of the Millennium Declaration, as well as improve the follow-up at the national level to various UN conferences and summits.

28.       Although its importance is certainly not denied there appears to be a somewhat incomplete understanding of the significance of a parliamentary dimension. I have a feeling, however, that we are gradually moving towards including a parliamentary dimension to the work of the United Nations. Today, nevertheless, United Nations officials tend to classify parliamentarians in the same category as non-governmental organisations or civil society, obviously an inappropriate approach given the significance of parliamentary oversight and the fact parliamentarians are part of the legislative process.

29.       The European Parliament proposes to launch, in co-operation with regional and world Parliamentary Assemblies (such as the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Inter-Parliamentary Union), a network of parliamentarians, which could meet on a regular basis in a Consultative Parliamentary Assembly under the United Nations, to discuss major political issues related to the United Nations’ activities and the challenges it faces. This proposal in perfectly in line with the Assembly’s previous proposals. These meetings could take place, for example, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York in the peripheral of the General Assembly biannual debate on co-operation with the regional organisations. Order 582 (2002) instructs the Political Affairs Committee to consider how a parliamentary dimension could be introduced in the work of the United Nations. I believe that, at least at this stage, the network proposed by the European Parliament is the most feasible option.

30.       No doubt, the General Assembly activities and debates could be rationalised and streamlined. At present the General Assembly is chaired by an Ambassador of a member state. To give the General Assembly more political leverage, it could be proposed that this important post would be given to a political figure, such as a former speaker of a parliament. Moreover, the term of office of the President should be extended beyond the present one year.

31.       As regards improving the working methods of the General Assembly, the Resolution Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (see Appendix IV: A/RES/58/126), comes forward with detailed proposals. I urge the UN members states to implement its provisions.  

c.         Economic and Social Security Council to enhance the United Nations’ role in international financial issues

32.               Globalization has had a highly uneven impact on the economies and the societies of member states, while it has failed to bring economic benefits to all. There is therefore an urgent need for the United Nations to promote a fairer and better global economic order. There are proposals on the table to this end, namely to set up at the United Nations an Economic and Social Security Council. This platform would provide the UN with a politically legitimate platform to discuss global economic and social problems. This council would increase the UN’s role in international financial issues, which are at present largely being dealt with by finance ministers and central bank governors.

33.               The economic policies of developing countries are often blamed for bad economic policies and failed economic reforms. Yet, economic analyses show that one of the key problems of global financial crises has been the opening up of capital markets. The end of the cold war has underlined the need for a new global economic order, which would pay due attention to social justice instead of being driven, as is often the case, by special interests.

34.       It has been proposed, notably by Joseph Stiglitz, Professor of Economics and Finance at ColumbiaUniversity, that such a commission could prepare reports and serve as a forum where alternative voices could be heard on trade policies and trade issues, such as the appropriate economic framework for reconstructing Iraq. In making a similar proposal the former President of the European Commission, Jacques Delors, has suggested that such a body should comprise the G-8 countries, China, India and the large regional organisations representing each continent. Its existence could contribute to closing the split between the large industrialised nations and the mass of other countries which has led to mutual recrimination on both sides. 

IV.        Conclusions

35.       Strengthening of the United Nations is not an easy task. But it is a necessary task.

36.       The strength and effectiveness of the United Nations depends on the active support of its member states and their policies. The United Nations can be just as strong as its member States want it to be.

37.       The Council of Europe, and naturally the Assembly composed of parliamentarians of its 45 member states, strongly feels a part of the United Nations. I can but underline the importance I put on this feeling of belonging and hope that every one of the United Nations’ member States would feel the same and consider the United Nations as their Organisation.

38.       The UN Secretary-General should make full use of the expertise of regional organisations, such as the Council of Europe, in addressing global threats and in making the UN stronger. Regional organisations can be instrumental in implementing various UN programmes and activities. The Council of Europe’s experience in areas, such as building democratic security and stability, its activities in the promotion and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, confidence-building measures, protection of national minorities, promotion of equality between women and men and the fight against racism can only strengthen and complement the United Nations’ response to the global threats.

Appendix I

Membership of the UN High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change

Appendix II

Terms of Reference of UN High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change

The past year has shaken the foundations of collective security and undermined confidence in the possibility of collective responses to our common problems and challenges.  It has also brought to the fore deep divergences of opinion on the range and nature of the challenges we face, and are likely to face in the future.

The aim of the High-level Panel is to recommend clear and practical measures for ensuring effective collective action, based upon a rigorous analysis of future threats to peace and security, an appraisal of the contribution collective action can make, and a thorough assessment of existing approaches, instruments and mechanisms, including the principal organs of the United Nations.

The Panel is not being asked to formulate policies on specific issues, nor on the UN’s role in specific places.  Rather, it is being asked to provide a new assessment of the challenges ahead, and to recommend the changes which will be required if these challenges are to be met effectively through collective action.

Specifically, the Panel will:

a)  Examine today’s global threats and provide an analysis of future challenges to international peace and security.  Whilst there may continue to exist a diversity of perception on the relative importance of the various threats facing particular Member States on an individual basis, it is important to find an appropriate balance at a global level.  It is also important to understand the connections between different threats. 

b)  Identify clearly the contribution that collective action can make in addressing these challenges. 

c)  Recommend the changes necessary to ensure effective collective action, including but not limited to a review of the principal organs of the United Nations. 

The Panel’s work is confined to the field of peace and security, broadly interpreted.  That is, it should extend its analysis and recommendations to other issues and institutions, including economic and social, to the extent that they have a direct bearing on future threats to peace and security.

Appendix III

List of participants – Meeting on 16 February 2004 - Paris

Members of the High-Level Panel

Mr Anand PANYARACHUN, Chair of the Panel
Former Prime Minister of Thailand

Mr Robert BADINTER
Member of the French Senate and Former Minister of Justice of France

Mr Joăo Clemente BAENA SOARES
Former Secretary General of the Organization of American States

Lord HANNAY OF CHISWICK
Former Permanent Representative of the UK to the United Nations, UK Special Envoy to Cyprus

Mr Amre MOUSSA
Secretary General of the League of Arab States

Mr Satish NAMBIAR
Former Lt. General in the Indian Army and Force Commander UNPROFOR

Mrs Sadako OGATA
Former United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Mrs Nafik SADIK
Former Execuctive Director of the United Nations Population Fund

Ms Loraine RICHARD-MARTIN
Secretary of the High-Level Panel

Ms Maria ZAROUI
Administrative Assistant

Members of the delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

Mr Peter SCHIEDER
President of the Parliamentary Assembly
Austria, Socialist Group

Mrs Tana de ZULUETA
Rapporteur on the Strengthening of the United Nations
Italy, Socialist Group

Mr Adrian SEVERIN
Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Relations with Non-Member countries of the Political Affairs Committee
Romania, Socialist Group

Mr Christos POURGOURIDES
Chaiman of the Sub-Committee on Human Rights of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Cyprus, Group of the European People’s Party

Mr Claudio AZZOLINI
Rapporteur on Relations between Europe and the United States
Italy, Group of the European People’s Party

Mr Terry DAVIS
former Rapporteur on Democracies facing terrorism
United Kingdom, Chairman of the Socialist Group

Mr Mats EINARSSON
former Rapporteur on Refugee questions in the Balkans
Sweden, Chairman of the Group of the United European Left

Mr Mikhail MARGELOV
Rapporteur on the Situation in the Middle East
Russia, European Democratic Group

Mrs Hanne SEVERINSEN
former Rapporteur on the United Nations
Denmark, Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group

Mr Bruno HALLER
Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly

Mr Bari? PERIN
Head of the Secretariat, Political Affairs Committee

Mrs Marja RUOTANEN
Secretary to the Political Affairs Committee

Mr Markus ADELSBACH
Deputy Head of the Private Office of the President

SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

Mr Walter SCHWIMMER
Secretary General of the Council of Europe

COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

Mr Mats ?BERG Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary,
Permanent Representative of Sweden to the Council of Europe,
Committee of Ministers Rapporteur on the United Nations

Appendix IV




Reporting Committee: Political Affairs Committee.

Reference to Committee: Doc. 9780, Reference 2828 of 27.05.03.

Draft Resolution and draft Recommendation unanimously adopted by the Committee on 8 March 2004.

Members of the Committee : Jakic (Chairman), Rogozin (Vice-Chairman), Spindelegger (Vice-Chairman), Ates (Vice-Chairman), Aguiar, Akhvlediani, de Aristegi, Arzilli, Atkinson,  Azzolini, Banáš, Berceanu, Bianco (alternate: de Zulueta), Blankenborg, Van den Brande (alternate: Goris),Cekuolis,Davern, Dreyfus-Schmidt, Druviete, Duivesteijn, Durrieu, Elo, Glesener, Goulet, Gross (alternate: Reimann), Hedrich, Henry, Hörster, Iwinski, Judd, Karpov, Klich, Koçi, Kostenko, Lindblad, van der Linden (alternate: Dees), Lloyd, Loutfi, Magnusson, Margelov, Martinez-Casan, Marty, Matušic, Medeiros Ferreira, Mercan, Micunovic, Mignon, Mihkelson, Muratovic, Nemcova, Nemeth, Oliynyk, Ouzky, Pangalos, Petrova-Mitevska (alternate : Zernovski), Petursdottir,  Pintat Rossell, Popov (alternate: Petrov), Pourgourides, Prentice, Prica, Prijmireanu, Prisacaru, de Puig, Pullicino Orlando, Ranieri, Roth, Severin, Severinsen, Seyidov, Tabajdi, Tekelioglu, Torosyan, Toshev, Tritz, Vakilov (alternate: Mollazade),  Voulgarakis, Wielowieyski, Wohlwend, Wurm, Zacchera (alternate : Malgieri), Ziuganov

Ex-officio: Davis, Eörsi, Einarsson, Russell-Johnston

N.B. : The names of the members who took part in the meeting are printed in italics

Secretariat of the Committee: Mr Perin, Mrs Ruotanen, Mr Chevtchenko, Mr Dossow

[1] Respectively Recommendation 1367 (1998), Recommendation 1411 (1999), Recommendation 1476 (2000), Resolution 1351 (2003).