By Javier Surasky
The current
President of the General Assembly, Annalena Baerbock (Germany), is likely to
formally launch the process of selecting the next UN Secretary-General by
inviting the submission of candidacies. However, it will be the next
President of the Assembly who will play a key role when the General Assembly
votes to confirm the candidate proposed by the Security Council—or to
select among several candidates, should the Council, for the first time in
history, submit more than one and leave the final decision to the Member
States.
Whoever
assumes the presidency during the 81st session of the General Assembly will, in
any case, be a central figure in this process.
And this is
where complications begin.
According
to a widely accepted practice, the presidency of the General Assembly rotates
among regional groups in the following order: Africa, Western Europe and other
developed states, Asia-Pacific, Eastern Europe, and Latin America and the
Caribbean.
However,
when we examine the regional economic commissions, we find a different
structure—one that notably combines Europe with other developed countries and
includes the United Nations Economic Commission for Western Asia (formerly the
United Nations Economic Commission for the Arab States). The members of this “Arab
commission” are also part of either the Asian or African regional groups,
depending on their geographic location, leading to overlapping affiliations.
Why does
this matter? The 22 Arab countries have sent a letter to the Asia-Pacific
Group, scheduled to assume the presidency next year, formally requesting
the nomination of Riyad Mansour, Palestine’s Permanent Observer to the United
Nations. This move appears to have led other Asia-Pacific countries
that were considering putting forward their candidates to step aside.
A
Palestinian presidency of the UN General Assembly would be a historic
milestone. It’s worth recalling that Palestine is not a full UN Member State
due to the ongoing U.S. veto in the Security Council. However, in May 2024, the
General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES7ES-10/23, which granted the State of
Palestine—on an exceptional basis and without setting a precedent—enhanced
participation rights “in the sessions and work of the General Assembly and
the international conferences convened under the auspices of the Assembly or
other organs of the United Nations, as well as in United Nations conferences.”
Among the
rights granted to Palestine is “the right of members of the delegation of
the State of Palestine to be elected as officers in the plenary and the Main
Committees of the General Assembly.”
To clarify
the scope of these new participation modalities, the current Secretary-General
submitted a note to the Assembly (A/ES-10/1003), explaining that this right
includes the possibility of a member of the Palestinian delegation being
elected as President of the General Assembly.
According
to the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, the President is elected by a simple
majority of the members present and voting (Rules 30 and 83 of the Rules of
Procedure of the General Assembly). If all members are present and vote, this
means 97 votes are needed. The Asia-Pacific Group has 55 votes, and the Arab
countries outside this group would add another 12, totaling 67 votes—or 69% of
the required votes. It is unlikely that additional support would not come from
other regional groups: in recent months, Palestine has gained formal
recognition from Mexico, Armenia, Slovenia, Ireland, Norway, Spain, the
Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, and Barbados—bringing the total
to 147 recognitions.
The
United States has already launched a campaign to block
this candidacy, but the outcome remains uncertain. Whether successful or not, this
attempt at a Palestinian presidency of the General Assembly will have
significant consequences for the future of international relations and for the
United Nations itself—an organization already weakened and underfunded.