What Is ‘the UN We Need’ and Who Gets to Choose?


Ben Donaldson and Florencia Gor | UN2020 – TRANSCEND Media Service

12 Oct 2019 – Why are civil society organisations excited about strengthening the UN when momentum seems distinctly in the opposite direction? When divisions are rife and the international system is in damage limitation mode, as the US cuts funding and repeatedly pulls out of UN bodies?

The opportunity is the UN’s 75th anniversary (UN75) next year and there are modest reasons for hope. The General Assembly (through GA.RES.299)  will host world leaders on 21 September 2020 to reaffirm their collective commitment to multilateralism. What could make this more than a talking shop is the associated intergovernmental preparatory process to agree a forward-looking outcome document on the theme: ‘The future we want, the UN we need’. The first clause seems somewhat redundant given we already have the Sustainable Development Goals, but the second clause speaks to a long overdue exercise which, if done well, could get to the heart of how multilateralism must radically adapt to face the challenges of the 21st century.

Commemorative moments have a mixed track record. The UN’s 50th anniversary, with all the hope surrounding the dawning of a new post-Cold War era, achieved little other than warm words and intangible commitments. Conversely, ten years later the 2005 World Summit made significant progress, upgrading the Human Rights Commission to the Human Rights Council complete with its Universal Periodic Review, global endorsement at the highest level of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’, and the establishment of meaningful peacebuilding architecture. These developments have not been without their controversy, yet the example of the UN’s 60th shows that if there are promising ideas on the shelf a world summit can provide a way to usher them in.

Are there ideas on the shelf this time around and might the bitterly divided political landscape allow for progress? Global threats like climate change, ecosystem collapse and cyber insecurity make it undeniably apparent that initiatives which can move us towards something much deeper than state-level cooperation are necessary. States must know that maintaining a monopoly on global governance is like clutching a poisoned chalice with potentially existential ramifications.

Overcoming such threats will require deep global partnerships between states, business, civil society and leaders at all levels. 2020 can provide a trigger to address this new reality and a launchpad for states to initiate much-needed programmes of renewal within the world organization. To be successful in identifying what constitutes ‘the UN we need’, states will need to listen to those beyond the New York bubble. Supported by a diverse coalition of civil society organisations, two initiatives: Together First and UN2020 are making this case, including through Together First’s recently launched call for ideas.

Where is the UN75 process up to?

The inter-governmental process got off to an ominous start in April 2019, with the first draft of the UN75 General Assembly resolution disappointingly (but unsurprisingly) excluding civil society from the process as well as from the summit itself (with the exception of a paltry allowance for youth participation). After a great furore from civil society and wrangling between states, the resolution that was finally adopted in June 2019 is slightly improved, permitting civil society attendance at next year’s summit as well as associated events for Charter Day (26 June 2020) and UN Day (24 October 2020). More broadly, it now emphasises ‘the need to engage civil society and youth in all activities to commemorate the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations’.

The decision of the Secretary General to designate Fabrizio Hochschild as Special Adviser on the Commemoration of the 75th anniversary, as well as the active involvement of the UN Department of Global Communications, should help streamline civil society’s inputs in the upcoming months. The UN’s aspiration to launch the world’s biggest conversation around how to build this ‘truly global partnership to realize our shared aspirations for a just, peaceful and sustainable future’ is ambitious and encouraging. If this can inspire states to open up and let their citizens into discussions around ‘the UN we need’ then it will be a major step forward.

Calls for deeper inclusion will only increase, and if states don’t open-up, the UN could become irrelevant and bypassed. The stumbling block tends not to be a lack of ideas, but a lack of political will. States should be encouraged by the existence of plenty of proposals that could offer useful stepping-stones towards the more radical destination required. A high-level UN focal point for civil society; mechanisms to address the UN’s democratic deficit such as a parliamentary assembly and a world citizens’ participatory instrument; overhauling UN bodies’ governance structures to include youth; or even reducing the prominence of the Security Council by referring more substantive peace and security matters to the General Assembly are all ideas which could be implemented without UN Charter reform.

If member states want to address global challenges, something has got to give. Rather than supporting specific proposals, our vision is for increased participation in global affairs through inclusive, transparent and fair global decision-making. UN2020 and Together First will be providing a platform for others throughout the UN75 process and beyond, championing options to deepen the current PGA’s mission to ‘make the UN relevant to all people’ and the UN’s goal of advancing people-centered multilateralism.

We have a little over ten years to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and avert catastrophic climate breakdown. Allowing all stakeholders a say in the process of overhauling global institutions and a seat at the subsequent decision-making table needs to be at the centre of the debate over the future of multilateralism.


Ben Donaldson (@benaldson) is Head of Campaigns at the United Nations Association – UK and is on the coordination team for the Together First campaign 

Florencia Gor (@flo_gor) is Congress Chair of the World Federalist Movement – Institute for Global Policy and a member of the UN2020 Coordination Group

Go to Original – un2020.org



Share this article:

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

One Response to “What Is ‘the UN We Need’ and Who Gets to Choose?”

  1. I do despair at such hopefulness — in the absence of the faintest trace of learning from the difficulties of the past and any reference to the remedies which might be appropriate. The whole focus is on packing as many “representative” (?) civil society bodies into the same arena — but with little recognition of the challenge of rendering the resulting dynamics fruitful rather than symbolic and tokenistic.

    The article merits comparison with that published last week in TMS by Roberto Savio on Farewell to the World Social Forum? (https://www.transcend.org/tms/2019/10/farewell-to-the-world-social-forum/)

    To this I commented, on the author’s own Other News site, to the effect that:

    Missing for me is any insight into why the communication dynamics within WSF were not the focus of any concern with a view to their enhancement. Many techniques have emerged since the origins of WSF as I have described in:

    Multi-option Technical Facilitation of Public Debate: Eliciting consensus nationally and internationally

    The World Economic Forum uses many. Especially relevant is the question of how any future World Peoples Assembly is to be expected to gets its act together if such matters are not addressed. The issue is also relevant to web-based assemblies if WSF is not going to assemble at a particular location.

    Does the proposed initiative with respect to the UN reflect a failure to learn from the fruitless dynamics of the past? Or is tokenism all that most people want?