Sunday Times 2
UN may face another calamity under a second Trump presidency
View(s):By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS (IPS) – US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House on January 20 next year may be another calamity for the United Nations—particularly if the second term turns out to be a re-run of his first presidency (2017-2021).
Trump’s past track record included the US withdrawal from the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO); threats against member states voting for anti-Israeli resolutions and slashing funds to a 72-year-old UN agency for Palestinian refugees.
Trump also pulled out of the 2016 Paris climate change agreement, describing climate change as “a hoax;” threatened to “totally destroy” a UN member state, North Korea; subjected the UN’s annual budget to a $285 million reduction for 2018-2019, and made attempts to wreck the 2015 Iranian nuclear agreement.
Trump triggered a global backlash when he singled out both Haiti and African nations as “shithole countries” eliciting protests from the 55-member African Union (AU). Trump also came under fire for his insulting statements that “all Haitians have AIDS” and Nigerians who visit the US “would never go back to their huts.”
Will a second Trump presidency be an equally disastrous sequel to the first? As Karl Marx once observed: “History repeats itself first as a tragedy, second as a farce”.
“When a significant historical event occurs with serious consequences, it’s initially perceived as a tragedy, but if the same type of event happens again later, it can seem almost comical or absurd because people haven’t learned from past mistakes”.
Is Trump capable of learning from his past political blunders?
Last week, Trump picked House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik of New York to be his next ambassador to the United Nations. She is described as a hard-liner and a strongly pro-Israeli stalwart.
In the UN, she was quoted as saying, Americans see a corrupt, defunct, and paralysed institution more beholden to bureaucracy, process, and diplomatic niceties than the founding principles of peace, security, and international cooperation laid out in its charter.
Dr James E. Jennings, President of Conscience International and Executive Director of US Academics for Peace told IPS the United States is approaching a period of renewed political turmoil at home combined with a jingoist policy abroad, clearly a dangerous combination.
Destabilising moves threatened by the new Trump Administration based on MAGA rhetoric, he said, include drastically cutting support for the Ukraine war, confronting Iran in a bellicose manner, and greatly weakening the United Nations and its agencies, including opposing even the merest lifeline to Palestine.
“It is particularly galling that the next Republican Congress seems willing—even enthusiastic—to follow Israel’s lead in cutting off all aid to UNRWA under today’s dire conditions in Gaza, with devastating consequences for human life and survival. Palestinian Children will die from the first day—and the second day—and the day after that, and so on day after day with no end in sight”.
It is a sad fact that most Americans, including many politicians, are ignorant of world geography and history, and therefore of the real-world consequences of turning a blind eye to human needs globally, he said.
“At this point, only peace activism everywhere can make a difference, including importantly, Israeli peace activist organisations. One of them has an appropriate title—yesh gvul—”There is a Limit!” Activists everywhere must stand up. There is a limit!” declared Dr Jennings.
Asked if Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is prepared for funding cuts that could come with the new Trump administration, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said: “I don’t want to pre-empt whatever decision may be made by the next (US) administration”.
“I would say that over the last few years the Secretary-General, I think, has been very frugal in managing the money because we’ve been over the last few years living in a liquidity crisis which has forced us to be very responsible how money is spent. The Secretary-General will work with the next administration”.
Asked about the US-UN relations under the first Trump presidency, Dujarric said: “What I can tell you is under the administration of President Trump four years ago, the Secretary-General had very good relations with the president.”
The fact that they had different opinions about a number of issues was clear to all, he said. “I think the Secretary-General stated his opinions. The US administration had its policies. It did not stop the Secretary-General from engaging with the United States government, just as all of the previous Secretaries-General have”.
Dr Purnima Mane, former Deputy Executive Director (Programme) and UN Assistant-Secretary-General (ASG) at the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), told IPS it is truly sobering to reflect on the impact of the US presidential elections on the UN.
“There is serious concern that there will be a repetition of what transpired during 2017-2021, when the US, acknowledged till then, as a strong champion of the UN entered a difficult phase in its relations with the UN”.
Through this period, the US displayed caution, lack of confidence in and sometimes hostility about the UN’s workings. It withdrew from global agreements like the 2016 Paris climate change agreement and organisations it had supported like UNESCO, threatened certain member states, and cut overall US support to the UN.
Those were difficult years, to say the least in terms of US-UN relations. In the last four years the US has shown renewed engagement with the UN but the world today is even more divided and in dire need of nations to work together to reinstate global order and bring economic and social equity to those who have consistently suffered as a result of the chaos we are seeing today, said Dr. Mane, a former President and CEO of Pathfinder International.
With many countries affected by political instability, civil unrest, and wars and with the negative impact of climate change even more palpable, Dr. Mane pointed out, it seems redundant to state that the world continues to need an even stronger UN to bring the countries together for an impetus towards global stability and development.
The United States, she noted, definitely plays a critical role in making this happen. If funding cuts return, the US pulls out of more agreements and any of the 5 permanent member States of the Security Council promote their own agendas at the cost of global goals, the chaos that will follow is unimaginable.
In some cases, other member states and foundations will hopefully augment their own support and take on greater leadership but in the current economic and political climate the world over, there is no guarantee of sustained and sizeable support or leadership.
And in the interim, many more lives are likely to be lost, development globally will definitely diminish with the SDGs seriously threatened, and hard-won efforts and investments will be wasted. People all over the world including the US do not deserve this, she declared.