By Javier Surasky
On this
occasion, however, Ryder provided some new insights regarding the rationale
behind the process that help understand its evolution and, perhaps, imagine its
possible outcomes with more information.
Ryder
said the process is entering an "acceleration phase in the UN80 initiative
(where) there is much underway and much that must be achieved in the coming
weeks." This indicates that we must remain vigilant to any developments
that may arise, as the level of pressure imposed by working under short
deadlines is increasing—bad news for implementing a reform, but a logical
response when dealing with an emergency cutback process.
He pointed out that they are "working very intensively at this moment on
the review of mandate implementation," which he identified as "the
true policy focus of the UN80 initiative." Later, he said he would
"love to believe that the mandate review would be completed by January 1,
though I don't think it will be." However, he emphasized that work on budget
adequacy and mandate review has short-term timelines, in contrast to a still
imprecise timeframe regarding the UN's structural review. Again, this leads me
to think that the UN80 initiative is starting from the top rather than from the
foundations—working on budget preparation without knowing what the future
structure of the UN will be seems like the reverse of the necessary approach.
In response to a dozen questions he received from correspondents from media accredited to the United Nations, Ryder said that "generally speaking, Member States consider this initiative as timely and necessary," and added:
- Some Member States, "particularly those who invest and contribute substantially to the system," encouraging the Secretary-General to be bold and ambitious. "The United States is following the process with interest," he would emphasize a bit later.
- Nevertheless, "there is another group of opinion among members that urges a certain degree of caution in the reform intention." And he added that "being rigorous in terms of our financial management, they might end up losing things they value" from the Organization.
- He also identified a third group of States, which may overlap with the other two, that emphasize the need to return to the foundations that led to the UN's creation: "back to basics is a mantra," he said, then defining "basics" as the three pillars of the Charter: Peace and Security, Development, and Human Rights. Somewhat later, responding to questions, he also said that "the United States message has emphasized the back-to-basics narrative, and there is an emphasis on peace and security."
"What
concerns me is a certain degree of skepticism: this is difficult, we have heard
this before, there is no reason to believe they will do it better this
time," he stated, recalling the reform process attempted in 2005 under
Kofi Annan's direction and his report "In Larger Freedom: Towards
Development, Security and Human Rights for All", to then say he is
"interacting with Member State groups, regional groups, the G77,
cross-regional groups, and meeting with ambassadors individually" to
advance the process and learn their positions, in addition to the two official
briefing sessions already offered.
Regarding
the announced job cuts (of 20%), the process advances with each system entity
presenting its reduction proposals to the Secretary-General, who must make
the final decisions. Still, he clarified that it will not result in a 20% cut in
each department since "there is no one-size-fits-all solution" and
that particular cuts will be associated with achieving increased efficiency.
Regarding
extrabudgetary-funded positions, he said their evolution will depend on those
who provide the funds that sustain them, so he preferred not to confuse this
issue with that of cuts to positions paid by the Organization's regular budget,
and insisted that the only solution to the UN's budgetary problem is for
"Member States to pay their contributions fully and on time,"
ensuring that "UN80 is not a solution to the liquidity problem
itself." What a blow!
One of
the journalists present asked him about the main dilemma faced today by those
leading the process, to which Ryder responded that it was "extremely
difficult" to identify one, but ended up settling on mentioning the
timeline issue: due to the calendar, he said, "we are obligated to present
budget proposals as early as September," and continued: "In an ideal
world" the approach to budgetary, mandate, and structural issues should be
done sequentially, looking first at mandates and extracting lessons from our
mandate implementation review. And that would inform resource allocations. We
don't have that luxury."
Regarding
relocations, he was asked whether the UN is playing the card of the economic
contribution that having its headquarters means for New York City when
negotiating with the United States, but Ryder pointed out that the "notion
of benefits for local economies from the UN's presence is a conversation that
occurs much more in Geneva and Vienna (...) The relative impact of the
multilateral system's presence in those capitals is much greater than the
impact of the UN in New York," which he described as "relatively
marginal."
He also
clarified that when talking about relocations, the examination aims to relocate
functions, not entities, and acknowledged that the reason behind this lies in
cost considerations, and that it primarily targets back-office functions, where
close contact with Member States is not a fundamental part of the work, and
that any relocation will be made to places where the UN "already has a
presence, a certain degree of infrastructure and a reliable set of conditions
that would allow us to function effectively," concluding with a firm
"there are no decisions yet."
The
Under-Secretary-General took advantage of a question to emphasize how the UN,
through the UN 2.0 initiative, is increasingly
intensively utilizing AI: "We are beginning to find our way to extract very useful
dividends from AI application," which "will have an effect on how the
organization works."
Regarding
what will happen in the coming months, after the presentation of the
Secretary-General's report with proposals to the States, Ryder explained that a
discussion is already underway about whether it would be advisable to open a
formal intergovernmental process to work based on the recommendations received,
which, Ryder said, will be evidence-based. "The report we want to put
together does not aim to show an interesting intellectual exercise, but to be a
practical policy exercise," where the initiative's objectives must be
clearly outlined. Then, it will depend on the States to open the process, send
us back the mandate to do more preparatory work before launching that process,
or take any other path they decide.
An interesting fact is that Ryder specifically mentioned both the Pact of the Future and the UN 2.0 initiative, as well as the Global Digital Compact, but avoided discussing the 2030 Agenda. Is the Pact for the Future the basis on which the Secretary-General is building his proposals report?
The UN80 initiative is moving forward, that's a fact. The real question now is what its true path, and above all, its true destination will be. Neither of these things is totally clear yet. Both are presented through high-sounding expressions, capable of being interpreted in a thousand different ways, with real content that we can barely glimpse through cracks that, fortunately and for better or worse, are opening wider and wider.