I.
1.
In
1945, the founding of the United Nations gave a war-weary world a vision of
what was possible in the arena of international cooperation and set a new
standard by which to guide diverse peoples and nations towards a peaceful
coexistence. Against the backdrop of the most calamitous war in human history,
the creation of a world organization for the protection of the dignity, equal
rights, and security of all peoples and nations was an extraordinary feat of
statecraft. Sixty years later, the questions that fuelled the San Francisco
Conference assert themselves anew: Why have the current systems of governance failed
to provide for the security, prosperity, and well-being of the world’s people?
What responsibilities do nations have towards their neighbors and their
citizens? What fundamental values should guide relationships between and within
nations to secure a peaceful future?
2.
In
the collective effort to find answers to these questions, a new paradigm is
taking hold – that of the interconnected nature of our challenges and our
prosperity. Whether the issue is poverty, the proliferation of weapons, the
role of women, AIDS, global trade, religion, environmental sustainability, the
well-being of children, corruption, or the rights of minority populations – it
is clear that none of the problems facing humanity can be adequately addressed
in isolation from one another. The blurring of national boundaries in the face
of global crises has shown, beyond a doubt, that the body of humankind
represents one organic whole.[1]
The practical implications of this emergent paradigm for the reform of the
United Nations are the focus of the Bahá’í International Community’s
contribution on the 60th anniversary of this august body.[2]
3.
The
processes of United Nations reform must be understood as part of a broader
evolutionary course, starting with early forms of international cooperation
such as the League of Nations and leading to increasing levels of coherence in
the administration of human affairs, facilitated by the creation of the United
Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the growing body of
international law, the emergence and integration of newly independent states,
and mechanisms for regional and global cooperation. The last fifteen years
alone have seen the establishment of the World Trade Organization, the
International Criminal Court, the African Union, the significant expansion of
the European Union, the global coordination of civil society campaigns, and the
articulation of the Millennium Development Goals – an unprecedented global
development framework aimed at the eradication of poverty worldwide. In the course
of these developments, the definition of state sovereignty – a cornerstone of
the modern system of international relations and a foundational principle of
the United Nations Charter – has itself emerged as the object of vigorous
debate: what are the limits of traditional notions of sovereignty? What
responsibilities do States have towards their citizens and towards each other?
How should such responsibilities be enforced?[3]
Although uneven and fraught with setbacks, the emergent institutions,
movements, and discourse evidence an increasing drive towards unity in world
affairs and constitute one of the pervasive features of social organization at
the end of the 20th century and in the first years of the new
millennium.
4.
Why,
then, given the dramatic increase of mechanisms and fora for cooperation is the
world so deeply divided against itself?
Why the universal affliction, which assails relations between those of
different cultures, creeds, religions, political affiliations, economic status,
and gender? To answer these questions, we must examine dispassionately the
legal standards, political and economic theories, values and religious
formulae, which have ceased to promote the welfare of humankind. The
advancement of men and boys at the expense of women and girls has sorely
limited the creative and material capacities of communities to develop and
address their problems; the neglect of cultural and religious minorities has
intensified ancient prejudices setting peoples and nations against one another;
an unbridled nationalism has trampled the rights and opportunities of citizens
in other nations; weak states have erupted in
conflict, lawlessness, and massive refugee flows; narrow economic agendas
exalting material prosperity have often suffocated the social and moral
development required for the equitable and beneficent use of wealth. Such
crises have laid bare the limits of traditional approaches to governance and
put before the United Nations the inescapable question of values: which values
are capable of guiding the nations and peoples of the world out of the chaos of
competing interests and ideologies towards a world community capable of
inculcating the principles of justice and equity at all levels of human
society?
5.
The
question of values and their inextricable link to systems of religion and
belief has emerged on the world stage as a subject of consuming global
importance, which the United Nations cannot afford to ignore. While the General
Assembly has passed a number of resolutions addressing the role of religion in
the promotion of peace and calling for the elimination of religious
intolerance,[4] it
struggles to grasp fully both the constructive role that religion can play in
creating a peaceful global order and the destructive impact that religious fanaticism
can have on the stability and progress of the world. A growing number of
leaders and deliberative bodies acknowledge that such considerations must move
from the periphery to the center of debate – recognizing that the full impact
of religion-related variables[5] on
governance, diplomacy, human rights, development, notions of justice and
collective security must be better understood.[6]
Neither political leaders nor academics foresaw such a widespread re-emergence
of religion in the public sphere, nor did the practice of international
relations develop the conceptual tools to address religion in a meaningful way.[7]
Our inherited notions of religion as an irrelevant and obstructionist voice in
the international public sphere offer no help in resolving the complex problems
before the leaders of the world’s nations. In fact, the appropriate role of
religion in the public sphere is one of the most pressing issues of our time.
6.
That religions have been manipulated and used for the accomplishment of
narrow ends cannot be denied. Yet, a careful historical analysis reveals that
the periods of greatest advancement in human civilization have been those where
both faith and reason were permitted to work together, drawing on the resources
of the totality of human insight and experience. For example, during the height
of Muslim civilization, sciences, philosophy, and the arts flourished; a
vibrant culture of learning propelled the human imagination to new heights,
providing, among others, the mathematical basis for many of today’s
technological innovations. Among humanity’s diverse civilizations, religion has
provided the framework for new moral codes and legal standards, which have
transformed vast regions of the globe from brutish and often anarchical systems
to more sophisticated forms of governance. The existing debate
about religion in the public sphere, however, has been driven by the voices and
actions of extreme proponents on both sides – those who impose their religious
ideology by force, whose most visible expression is terrorism – and those who
deny any place for expressions of faith or belief in the public sphere. Yet
neither extreme is representative of the majority of humankind and neither
promotes a sustainable peace.
“A world community in
which all economic barriers will have been permanently demolished and the
interdependence of capital and labour definitely recognized; in which the
clamor of religious fanaticism and strife will have been forever stilled; in
which the flame of racial animosity will have been finally extinguished; in
which a single code of international law—the product of the considered judgment
of the world’s federated representatives—shall have as its sanction the instant
and coercive intervention of the combined forces of the federated units; and
finally a world community in which the fury of a capricious and militant
nationalism will have been transmuted into an abiding consciousness of world citizenship…”[8]
II.
10.
In
light of the foregoing analysis and the areas currently under consideration by
the United Nations, we offer the following recommendations as concrete steps
towards the realization of a more just and effective United Nations system. Our
recommendations address human rights and the rule of law, development,
democracy, and collective security.
11. No effective and peaceful international order can be
founded and sustained unless it is firmly grounded in the principles of justice
and the rule of law. An adherence to such principles provides the requisite
stability and legitimacy required to gain the support of peoples and nations
that the system aims to serve. We offer the following recommendations:
a.
The
grave threats posed by religious extremism, intolerance and discrimination
require the United Nations to address this issue openly and earnestly. We call
on the United Nations to affirm unequivocally an individual’s right to change
his or her religion under international law. The General Assembly may request
the International Court of Justice, under Article 96 of the United Nations
Charter, to issue an advisory opinion on the issue of freedom of religion or
belief. Specifically, the Court could be asked whether the principle of freedom
of religion or belief has attained the status of jus cogens, customary
international law, or is merely left to the interpretation of each state. Such a clarification would help to remove fallacious interpretations of
this right and lend moral force to the condemnation of policies and practices
that violate the principle of non-discrimination in matters of religion or
belief.[9]
b.
Beyond the ongoing structural and functional reforms
of the United Nations human rights machinery, the legitimacy of this machinery
must be restored through its consistent adherence to the highest principles of
justice, including those elaborated in the Charter of the United Nations and
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Only in this way, will it secure the
legitimacy and trust of Member States and their citizens required for it to
exercise its mandate.
c. The General Assembly
should consider setting a timeline for the universal ratification of
international human rights treaties.
d.
The Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights,
bolstered by the
requisite moral, intellectual, and material resources, must now become the
standard-bearer in the field of human rights and an effective tool in
alleviating the suffering of individuals and groups whose rights are
denied.
Ø
As one of the most effective instruments for the
protection of human rights, Special Procedures should receive adequate
budgetary and administrative support. Government cooperation with Special
Procedures should not only be limited to access to the country in question but,
equally important, should include full consideration of subsequent
recommendations. These should be reflected in the interactive dialogues between
the Rapporteur and
Ø The Public Information section of the Office of the High Commissioner should be developed in order to allow resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights/Human Rights Council, recommendations of the Special Procedures and concluding observations of the treaty monitoring bodies to be accorded more prominence in the media. This could include, for example, the translation of documents into relevant national languages in order to generate more publicity.
Ø The Office of the High Commissioner, along with the Council, should continue its productive engagement with non-governmental organizations, which, since its inception, has contributed positively both to the work of the Office and to the development of non-governmental organizations’ capacity to interact meaningfully in this context.
a. The capacity of people to
participate in the generation and application of knowledge is an essential
component of human development. As such, priority must be given to the
education of girls and boys, women and men in order to enable them to set the
path of their own development and to apply their knowledge in the service of
the greater community. The United Nations should consider that in terms of
economic investment, the education of girls may well yield the highest return of all investments available in
developing countries considering both private benefits, as well as returns to
family members and the greater community.[10]
b.
We
submit for the consideration of the United Nations five spiritual principles,
which may serve as a basis for the creation of indicators of human development,
to be used alongside existing measures of development. These principles
include: unity in diversity, equity and justice, equality of the sexes,
trustworthiness and moral leadership, and the freedom of conscience, thought,
and religion.[11]
c.
The
rich countries of the world have a moral obligation to remove export and trade
distorting measures that bar the entry of countries struggling to participate
in the global market. The Monterrey Consensus, which recognizes the importance of creating a ‘more open,
rule-based, non-discriminatory and equitable’ system of trade is a step in the
right direction.[12]
d.
Alongside
reform in systems of trade, countries must facilitate the flow of labor and
address the dehumanizing impact of trafficking in persons, which leads to
widespread economic and sexual exploitation of people seeking a better life.
13. We
commend the international community for its commitment to democracy and to a
freely elected government as a universal value. However, the standard of
deliberation and truth-seeking required for the realization of goals set by the
United Nations needs to go far beyond the patterns of partisanship, protest,
and compromise that tend to characterize present day discussions of human
affairs. What is needed is a consultative process – at all levels of
governance – in which individual participants strive to transcend their
respective points of view, in order to function as members of one body with its
own interests and goals. Through participation and unity of purpose,
consultation becomes the operating expression of justice in human affairs.
Without this principled anchor, democracy falls prey to the excesses of
individualism and nationalism, which tear at the fabric of the community - both
nationally and globally.
14.
Beyond
the administration of material affairs, governance is a moral exercise. It is
the expression of a trusteeship – a responsibility to protect and to serve the
members of the social polity. Indeed, the exercise of democracy will succeed to
the extent that it is governed by the moral principles that are in harmony with
the evolving interests of a rapidly maturing human race. These include:
trustworthiness and integrity needed to win the respect and support of the
governed; transparency; consultation with those affected by decisions being
arrived at; objective assessment of needs and aspirations of communities being
served; and the appropriate use of scientific and moral resources.[13]
We offer the following recommendations:
a. To secure the
legitimacy, confidence, and support needed for the realization of its goals,
the United Nations needs to address the democratic deficits in its own agencies
and deliberations.
b. Thorough
deliberation of the pressing issues of the day requires the United Nations to
develop modes for constructive and systematic engagement with organizations of
civil society (including businesses and religious organizations) as well as
members of national parliaments. The relationship between civil society organizations,
parliamentarians and the traditional diplomatic processes of the United Nations
need not be one of competition but rather complementarity, rooted in the
recognition that the relative strengths of all three constituencies are
necessary for effective decision-making and subsequent implementation.[14] We urge the United
Nations to give serious consideration to the proposals put forth in the Report
of the Panel of Eminent Persons on UN-Civil Society Relationships.[15]
c. A healthy
democracy must be founded on the principle of the equality of men and women and
equal recognition of their contribution to the establishment of a just society.
In its efforts to promote democracy, the Member States of the United Nations
must vigilantly work for the inclusion of women in all facets of governance in
their respective countries. This is not a privilege but a practical necessity
for the achievement of the high-minded and complex goals before the
Organization today.
d. The meaningful
integration of minority groups in democratic processes is of critical
importance – both to shield minorities from the abuses of the past and to
encourage their participation and responsibility for the well-being of society.
We urge Member States, in their work to promote democracy, to strive for the
full inclusion of minorities – belonging to any faith, race, or class – in the
processes of goal-setting and deliberation. As the cultural make-up of states
becomes increasingly fluid and diverse, no one cultural or religious group can
lay claim to an adequate definition of the national interest.
15.
We
welcome the United Nations’ efforts to articulate a more comprehensive vision
of collective security, based on the understanding that in our interconnected
world, a threat to one is a threat to all. The Bahá’í Faith envisions a system
of collective security within a framework of a global federation, a federation
in which national borders have been conclusively defined, and in whose favor
all the nations of the world will have willingly ceded all rights to maintain
armaments except for purposes of maintaining internal order.[16]
While cognizant of the grave shortfalls of the current system of collective
security, we commend the Security Council for its landmark Resolution on
“Women, Peace, and Security,”[17]
recognizing for the first time in its history the needs of women and girls in
conflict and post-conflict situations[18]
and their enduring role in the promotion of peace. We offer the following
recommendations:
a.
To
address the democracy deficit and relentless politicization of the Security
Council, the United Nations must in due course move towards adopting a
procedure for eventually eliminating permanent membership and veto power.[19]
Alongside procedural reforms, a critical change in the attitude and conduct are
needed. Member States must recognize that in holding seats on the Security
Council and as signatories to the Charter of the United Nations, they have a
solemn moral and legal obligation to act as trustees for the entire community
of nations, not as advocates of their national interests.[20]
b.
A
definition of terrorism must be adopted. We agree with the Secretary-General’s
characterization of terrorism as any action, “intended to cause death or
serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of
intimidating a population or compelling a Government or an international
organization to do or abstain from doing any act.” Moreover, it is imperative
that problems such as terrorism be consistently addressed within the context of
other issues that disrupt and destabilize society.[21]
c.
We
urge the United Nations to take the necessary steps to increase the
participation of women at all levels of decision-making in conflict resolution
and peace processes, locally, nationally and internationally, including the
Department of Peacekeeping Operations.[22]
16. We believe the task of establishing a peaceful world is now in the hands of the leaders of the nations of the world, by virtue of the tremendous responsibilities with which they have been entrusted. Their challenge now is to restore the trust and confidence of their citizens in themselves, their government, and the institutions of the international order through a record of personal integrity, sincerity of purpose, and unwavering commitment to the highest principles of justice and the imperatives of a world hungering for unity. The great peace long envisioned by the peoples and nations of the world is well within our grasp.
[1] While the United Nations has
begun to formally recognize the interdependence of human rights, development,
and collective security, such a holistic perspective has been echoed throughout
the contributions of civil society organizations to the work of the United
Nations, as, for example at the global United Nations conferences including the
Conference on Environment and Development (1992), the World Conference on Human
Rights (1993), World Conference on Population and Development (1994), the
Fourth World Conference on Women (1995), the World Summit for Social
Development (1995), and the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements
(1996).
[2] The Bahá’í International
Community, in its capacity as an international nongovernmental organization,
has been actively involved with the United Nations since its founding
conference in 1945. On the occasion of the United Nations’ 10th
anniversary, the Bahá’í International Community submitted its proposals for
Charter Revision to the Secretary-General based on the recognition that “real
sovereignty is no longer vested in the institutions of the national state
because the nations have become interdependent; that the existing crisis is
moral and spiritual as well as political; and that the existing crisis can only
be surmounted by the achievement of a world order representative of the peoples
as well as the nations of mankind (Bahá’í International Community, “Proposals
for Charter Revision Submitted to the United Nations by the Bahá’í
International Community [1955],” The Bahá’í World 1954 – 1963, Vail-Ballou
Press, Inc., Binghamton, New York, 1970). In 1995, the Bahá’í International
Community released a statement on the 50th anniversary of the United
Nations, which highlighted the trend toward the ever-increasing interdependence
of humanity and presented proposals for the resuscitation of the General
Assembly, development of the executive function, strengthening the world court,
promoting economic and moral development, human rights and the advancement of
women (Bahá’í International Community, Turning Point for All Nations,
Bahá’í International Community’s United Nations Office, New York, 1995.)
Throughout its history of association with the United Nations, the Bahá’í
International Community has contributed its vision and experience through
submissions dealing with the advancement of women, human rights, the
environment, global prosperity, and economic development, among others.
[3] In 2000, in response to the
alarming failure of the international community to intervene, or to intervene
effectively, in massive crises such as
[4] For
example, “Promotion of interreligious dialogue” (A/RES/59/23), the “Promotion
of religious and cultural understanding, harmony and cooperation” (A/RES/59/142),
the “Global Agenda for Dialogue Among Civilizations” (A/RES/56/6), the “Elimination
of all forms of religious intolerance” (A/RES/59/199), and the UNESCO
Director-General’s report (A/59/201) to the 59th Session of the UN
General Assembly “Promotion of religious and cultural understanding, harmony
and cooperation” (A/RES/58/128).
[5] These include, among others,
religious teachings and interpretation, followers of religions, religious
leaders and institutions.
[6] While a detailed description
is beyond the scope of this statement, examples of the resurgence of religion
as a matter of urgent political importance includes: widespread violence in the
name of religion; spread of religious fundamentalism and its impact on
political regimes; increasing tension between religion and States’ policies;
challenges in the design of national and regional governing structures capable
of satisfying demands for fair representation from different religious groups;
social, political and economic integration of religious minorities; clashes
between religious and civil law; impact of religion in international policy
forums (i.e. International Conference on Population and Development, Cairo,
1994; Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, 1995); violation of human
rights in the name of religion including the right to change one’s religion.
Such developments are set against the increased efforts at inter-faith dialogue
and cooperation between religious leaders and their communities; the impressive
global networks of religiously inspired charitable and humanitarian
organizations and movements calling attention to the ethical dimensions of
global economic integration; the intellectual and moral legacy of religions in
the articulation of moral principles (e.g. just war ethic); the capacity of
religions to move individuals and groups towards selflessness, non-violence,
and reconciliation.
[7] Several factors have
contributed to the near complete rejection of religion in concepts of
international relations. First, the social sciences were based upon the work of
those who believed that religion was giving way to rational and scientific
modes of thought which would crush what they saw as the ignorance and
superstition caused by religion, thereby ushering in a period of modernity.
Second, “not only was international relations theory (like other social
sciences) founded upon the belief that religion was receding from the world as
an important factor, it can be argued that the modern context for the relations
between states was founded on intentionally secular principles. The modern
concept for the territorial state, the basis for modern international
relations, was articulated by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648,” which, “was
designed to end the Thirty Years’ War between Protestant and
[8] Shoghi Effendi, “The Goal of
a New World Order” [1931], The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh (Wilmette,
Ill.: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1991).
[9] Bahá’í
International Community, Freedom to Believe (Bahá’í International
Community’s United Nations Office,
[11] For a detailed discussion
see: Bahá’í International Community, Valuing Spirituality in Development:
Initial Considerations Regarding the Creation of Spiritually Based Indicators
for Development, a concept paper written for the World Faiths Development
Dialogue, Lambeth Palace, London (The Bahá’í Publishing Trust: London, 1998).
[12] The
[13] In the 1980s and 1990s the world made dramatic progress in opening up
political systems and expanding political freedoms. Over eighty countries took
significant steps towards democracy, and today 140 of the world’s nearly 200
countries hold multiparty elections—more than ever before. Despite these
positive developments, Gallup International’s Millennium Survey (1999) found
that of the 50,000 people surveyed in 60 countries, less than a third felt that
their country was governed by the will of the people. Only 1 in 10 respondents
said that their government responded to the
people’s will.
[14] Over the last five
years, the United Nations has generated numerous examples of innovative
governance: In
2000, the United Nations Economic and Social Council established a Permanent
Forum on Indigenous Issues to serve as an advisory body to the Council on
indigenous issues relating to economic and social development, culture, the environment,
education, and health and human rights, culminating a decades-long struggle of
indigenous peoples to regain standing within the global community; in June 2005, the General
Assembly – for the first time - held interactive hearings with civil society
and the private sector, in which some 200 non-governmental organizations
presented their views on United Nations reform for consideration by Member
States in preparation for the 2005 United Nations World Summit; also in June,
2005, a tripartite convening group composed of a core
group of Member States (Argentina, Bangladesh, Ecuador, Gambia, Germany, Indonesia, Iran,
Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Morocco, Pakistan, Philippines, Senegal, Spain, Thailand,
and Tunisia),
civil society, the United Nations Educational, Social and Cultural Organization
and the Department of Economic and Social Affairs organized a conference
titled, Interfaith Cooperation for Peace, which aimed to provide input
to the 2005 World Summit regarding strategies to promote interfaith cooperation
for peace. It was the first time that a Member State-initiated conference had
been co-organized and led by Member States, civil society and United Nations
agencies working alongside. Given the challenging nature of the subject matter,
the organizational approach provided a useful template for similar endeavors in
the future. Also worthy of note is that in 2002, the International
Parliamentary Union was granted permanent observer status in the General
Assembly of the United Nations, setting in motion new forms of cooperation.
[15] Panel of Eminent Persons on
UN-Civil Society Relationships. We the Peoples: Civil Society, the UN and
Global Governance. (United Nations:
[16] For the system to be
successful, unity, strength, elasticity and public opinion are essential: unity
of thought and purpose among the permanent members, strength involving the use
of adequate force to ensure the efficacy of the system, elasticity to enable
the system to meet the legitimate needs of its afflicted upholders, and
universal public opinion - that of women and men - to secure collective action.
[17] Security
Council Resolution 1325 (S/RES/1325 (2000)
[18] Typically wars and conflicts
have drawn little distinction between militants and civilians, and between
adults and children. Yet armed conflicts affect women and girls differently
from men and boys. For example, rape and sexual violence perpetrated by the
armed forces, whether governmental or other actors, including peacekeeping
personnel, increase the spread of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted
diseases. Most of the HIV/AIDS victims in developing countries are women and
girls. That disease leaves millions of orphans who, in most cases, are cared
for by older women.
[19] While the veto has often
served as an important safeguard against the oppressive majoritarianism, it has
also obstructed effective action against countries that pose a threat to their
neighbors. An interim measure may include not using veto power when voting on
questions of genocide or other gross threats to international peace and
security.
[20] The United Nations Charter
states that, “In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United
Nations, its Members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for
the maintenance of peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its
duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.”
(Article 24).
[21] Such disruptive and
destabilizing factors include, among others: governments’ failure to
meaningfully integrate religious and ethnic minorities, increased access to
weapons; the destabilization and collapse of governments; and a general sense
of social, political, economic, cultural crisis - all of which combine to
create an environment that could invite violent radical ideologies to take hold
and flourish.
[22] This requires the
implementation of the Secretary-General’s strategic plan of action (A/49/587),
which calls for an increase in the participation of women at decision-making
levels in conflict resolution and peace processes. Member States need to follow
through with their commitments under international law including the United
Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000).