UN at crossroads as Irish take up reins

The intersection of humanitarian issues and high politics is an interesting crossroads

The intersection of humanitarian issues and high politics is an interesting crossroads. At time of writing, one is afraid to shed too many tears for the victims at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon for fear there will be none left for any civilian casualties of the inevitable military retaliation.

In these incredible circumstances, Ireland finds itself thrust into the world spotlight as president of the Security Council for the month of October. The Irish have an admirable interest in extremely important but fairly unfashionable issues like the Congo and Angola and these were highlights of the original draft agenda. But with war clouds gathering, it may well be that even these weighty topics have to take second place if a major international crisis erupts.

The last time I visited New York was in June, when I covered the AIDS summit at the United Nations. There was terrible tragedy and suffering, but it was at arm's length. Nurses and volunteers would tell of the plague sweeping Africa and you would draw in your breath and shake your head, but at least it wasn't happening right in front of you.

The World Trade Centre tragedy is in your face. Go anywhere in the New York or New Jersey region and those tragic, makeshift "missing" posters are everywhere on walls or lamp-posts.

READ MORE

UN delegates deal with tragic issues on a day-to-day basis. All the disasters of Africa have been gathered up in a bundle and dumped outside the door of the world body's headquarters on the East River. Any conscientious diplomat would probably fall victim to depression from the sheer weight of gloom and suffering were it not for New York itself. Inside the UN building the topics are usually the bloody civil war in the Congo, the aftermath of genocide in Rwanda and Burundi, or the eternal hatreds of the Balkans - but outside is the permanent carnival of Manhattan.

Hell was always somewhere else until September 11th, when hell came home. UN people were as badly shaken as anyone else, not least because they work in an elegant skyscraper which could just as easily be the target for some demented pilot of doom. The whole world was shaken; Russians, Chinese, Irish and French all voted the same way on Security Council Resolution 1368, which was passed unanimously in less than an hour and gave the US substantial diplomatic leeway in its response to the atrocities. Well-informed sources say the Americans had a significant role in drafting the resolution, which implicitly endorsed the US right to hit back unilaterally in self-defence without having to worry unduly about the bureaucratic procedures of the UN.

This week, the shockwaves could still be felt at UN headquarters. A journalist colleague here said he had a tally of 27 friends lost in the disaster. UN administration staff were raising money for the families of the victims. A large book of condolences lay open in the main hallway and someone always seemed to be leaning over it, pen in hand.

Our representatives at the UN face a difficult month holding the line between the imperatives of a great power in an angry mood and the potentially volatile state of public opinion back home.

President Bush has said that those who are not with the US are against it. Half-hearted allies may find there is a price to be paid for their ambivalence. But a single missile going astray and hitting a mosque instead of a terrorist training camp could alienate support. Europe is standing firm, but what if European capitals are targeted by the practitioners of the new terrorism? The new phrase for it in military circles is "asymmetric warfare", although the first recorded instance was David's joust with Goliath. What good are aircraft-carriers and vast armies against opponents who put no value on human life, least of all their own?

Nevertheless the US has embarked on what was originally and rather tactlessly called a "crusade" against terrorism. The Security Council effectively gave the green light to the Americans to take military action in the short term without a formal UN mandate. But US leaders are talking about a long-term campaign that would last several years and be conducted by an alliance of many countries. That cannot be carried through properly without involving the UN. The French, British and US delegations were leading the way this week in the preparation of a resolution aimed at putting pressure on all countries to implement the various UN conventions against terrorism. This would be a kind of check-list of measures taken to counteract terrorists, whether through curbs on money-laundering or precautions against hijacking. Any country which failed to meet the requirements would be in the doghouse internationally. Meanwhile on Monday the General Assembly, comprising all 189 member-states, will hold a special discussion on terrorism.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan insists that only the UN can give "global legitimacy" to any long-term campaign and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, has highlighted the legal rather than military methods by which suspected terrorists could be brought to justice. But if the anti-terrorist campaign goes horribly wrong and provokes a humanitarian disaster or uncontrollable military conflict, all eyes will turn to the Security Council as the means of getting the international community off the hook.

When Ireland chose to run for Security Council membership, it knew there would be hard and unpalatable choices to make. In the General Assembly, you are in some ways like the hurler on the ditch, but in the Security Council, there is no hiding place.

Diplomats were sanguine at the time; making difficult decisions would be good for us as a nation, they said. Last time Ireland was on the council, Britain went to war with Argentina and Israel invaded Lebanon. But even these major issues pale in comparison with the disaster movie that came to life on September 11th.

Nobody in the UN really knew during the week precisely how and when the US was going to respond - or if they did, they weren't saying. One seasoned observer's prediction was a hard-hitting but measured anti-terrorist operation in Afghanistan, enough to "take out the bad guys" without engendering widespread panic and a humanitarian disaster in the region. Others, with less faith in Washington's upper echelons, warned in apocalyptic terms of massive and widespread retaliation leading to further terror attacks inside the US.

Everyone agreed that nothing would ever be the same again. The buzz of life in Manhattan was subdued. There was a stillness at Ground Zero, the gash of land where the twin towers once stood, although you could sense the ghosts of the unburied dead all around you. The most popular poem among the intelligentsia was W.H. Auden's 'September 1, 1939', which was written in New York on the eve of the second World War and includes the chillingly appropriate lines: "The unmentionable odour of death/ Offends the September night."

Meanwhile, on a subway train from New York to New Jersey, a man with a voice like Orson Welles interrupts the reverie of the passengers with an appeal for money for the homeless. Startled, a woman embraces her husband. We are under the Hudson River and the tunnel may not be totally secure. Normally, the man would be given some money, but this time everyone ignores him, staring into the middle distance, waiting for him to go away.

It's an apt metaphor for the hurt and pain Americans feel about the evil that has come upon them. Emissaries from a poor quarter of the world have struck at the heart of the great power. The US flags on display in every other shop window and on every second car and pick-up truck reflect the drawing together of a great people forced into solidarity. The generous, if sometimes misunderstood, face of the US will now be less visible than the vengeful countenance of a nation that believes attack is the best form of defence.

Planes flying into the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon; an international terror network that abides by no civilised rules and could strike anywhere any time; the world's greatest power declaring war on an invisible enemy. Next month, our diplomat explorers must find their way in the uncharted territories of this alarming new world.