UN: In search of a winning formula 

At a press conference just before polling day, the phenomenally successful author remained candid as he fielded a battery of questions focusing on his manifesto and his chances of winning. At one point, a reporter asked him: "Mr Mailer, what will be the first thing you will do if elected Mayor." "I will demand a recount," quipped the legendary author who, at age 25, wrote one of the most definitive books on World War II titled "The Naked and the Dead."

After having suffered three consecutive defeats at UN elections last year, Sri Lanka may be tempted to go the way of Mailer, if and when it wins its next elections.

Just after losing three key elections — for Director-General of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), a Judge of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and a seat in the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)— Sri Lanka decided to take a breather.

In 1998, Sri Lanka also lost two other important elections: for the posts of judges in the international war crimes tribunal for Rwanda and the international war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Both candidates, sponsored by the government, lost their elections. By a stroke of luck, however, one of the losing candidates eventually found a place in the Rwanda tribunal because of an unanticipated vacancy just after the elections. Commenting on the rash of failures, a cynical journalist gave an unsolicited piece of advice to a visiting foreign ministry official last year: keep off all UN elections until Sri Lanka can master the art of stuffing ballot boxes (which most political parties are adept at during general elections back home, anyway).

As a matter of policy, Sri Lanka has now decided it will not contest any elections at the UN unless and until it is confident of winning. 

An outcome of this policy was to skip elections to a UN body crucial to Sri Lanka: the Human Rights Commission in Geneva. Meanwhile, a request by a former World Bank official, who sought government sponsorship to run for a seat in the International Commission of Jurists, has been turned down. "Sorry," he was told, "we have placed a moratorium on all UN elections." 

Perhaps the moratorium may last until Sri Lanka finds the winning formula, including organised campaigning, suitable candidates, political goodwill and a superb sense of public relations. If you lack these attributes, you are doomed to fail even before you kick-start your campaign. 

Last year, however, Rohan Perera was elected unopposed as chairman of the UN Adhoc Committee on Terrorism which was responsible for drafting two global conventions against terrorism. 

As Legal Adviser to the foreign ministry, he was a candidate with strong credentials for the right post at the right time. An equally formidable unknown factor in UN elections is to be pitted against a country such as the US or Japan. Both countries are known to twist arms, hold you to ransom or suffocate you with foreign aid— all to win votes. At the UNESCO elections last year, both Saudi Arabia and Japan spent heavily "buying" votes. Japan probably spent more because it was the eventual winner. Meanwhile, an intense election campaign is currently underway for two of the regional non-permanent seats. Italy, Norway and Ireland are battling for two of the West European seats while Sudan and Mauritius are vying for the African seat. Both Italy and Ireland have made several pledges to help write off Third World debts and increase development assistance to the world's poorer nations— all with an eye on the Security Council elections.

The curious thing about the African contest is that Sudan has been endorsed by the African group as the sole candidate for the seat — as has Singapore for the Asian seat. Singapore is a shoo-in, but Sudan isn't. 

If the game is played according to the rule book, Sudan should win the seat uncontested. But the US apparently is determined to keep Sudan out of the Security Council. 

After all, Sudan is "a terrorist state" by US standards. The entry of Mauritius is bound to split developing nations who usually abide by decisions taken by regional groups. 

A high-ranking State Department official, who was in town recently, met with several smaller regional groups seeking their support against Sudan— thereby giving the unmistakable impression that the US is behind the Mauritius candidature. 

Last week, Mauritius made it official when Foreign Minister Anil Kumarsingh Gayan told the General Assembly he wishes to "confirm" the candidature of Mauritius for one of the non-permanent seats at the Security Council elections scheduled for October 10. One ambassador predicts that if the deadlock is not resolved, both countries stand to lose. A compromise candidate from the African group may eventually emerge the winner. But if Sudan wins, it is the US, not Mauritius, that will face a humiliating defeat. 

Editorial/ Opinion Contents