The Hindu Business Line : Saga of India's bid for UN Secretary-General's post

The manner in which Mr Shashi Tharoor's candidature was initiated gives one an uneasy feeling that there is a lack of coherence and careful consideration in decision-making on serious issues of national security and foreign policy.

Among the many myths that have landed India in deep diplomatic embarrassment in the past are those about the so called "solidarity of the non-aligned and developing countries" and the belief that just because we have supported Arab and African causes in the past, we will get the support of Arab and African countries in world forums such as the United Nations and the Non-Aligned Movement.

This fanciful thinking led us to one of our worst diplomatic disasters since Independence, when we contested against Japan for a seat on the UN Security Council in 1996. The then External Affairs Minister, Mr I. K. Gujral, appeared to believe that the spirit of "Afro-Asian Solidarity" would lead developing countries in Asia, Africa and elsewhere to back our candidature against Japan, which as a loyal ally of the US, offered no meaningful support either to the struggle against apartheid, or the "Arab cause".

We were in for a rude shock. Japan trounced us in the elections securing 142 votes against the barely 40 votes we secured. Less than a handful of our Arab and African friends backed us in this ill-fated and ill-advised diplomatic misadventure.

Prudent moves

Ever since the fiasco of 1996, we have been prudent in avoiding actions that could again lead to diplomatic disgrace.

But as our economy grew rapidly and we started engaging the world meaningfully in economic terms, we have been extremely successful regionally, having been invited to such forums as the East Asia Summit, the ASEAN Regional Forum and even to G-8 summits. In elections to the UN Human Rights Commission earlier this year India received 173 votes trouncing even Japan in the number of votes we secured.

But amidst all these developments flowing from carefully crafted diplomatic strategies, came the surprise announcement that India was nominating an Under Secretary-General of the UN, Mr Shashi Tharoor, as its candidate for the post of UN Secretary-General. This decision was taken without any comprehensive survey of Mr Tharoor's chances either by the Prime Minister's Office, the External Affairs Ministry or the Permanent Mission to the UN.

Mr Tharoor hails from Kerala and his nomination followed setbacks that the ruling dispensation faced in recent Assembly elections in the State. Interestingly, when the Prime Minister visited St. Petersburg for the G-8 Summit not a single world leader endorsed Mr Tharoor's candidacy.

Straw poll

It is now the turn, by convention, for an Asian to become the UN Secretary-General. The other candidates in the fray are the Thai Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Suraikart Sathirathai, the South Korean Foreign Minister, Mr Ban Ki-Moon, and Sri Lankan Diplomat Jayantha Dhanapala. Under UN General Assembly Resolution 11/46, the Security Council is expected to send one name for the post of UNSG for endorsement by the General Assembly.

To determine the measure of support each candidate enjoys, the 15 members of the Security Council are asked whether they "encourage" or "discourage" a particular candidate, in a series of "straw polls". If any candidate is opposed by a Permanent Member of the Security Council, he automatically withdraws from the race.

While Mr Tharoor emerged second in the first "straw poll", where the Thai and Sri Lankan candidates did not do well, there is still a long way to go before any result emerges, as there is as yet no indication of how the US and China have voted and will ultimately act.

The waters will get really muddied for Tharoor should Pakistan put forward a credible woman candidate like Maleeha Lodi, as UN General Assembly Resolution 51/241 of 1997 says that selection process should pay "due regard to regional rotation and gender equality".

Sans support

India cannot ignore the hard reality that it has entered the fray without getting the support of even a single member of the UN Security Council, including from our very supportive Russian friends. Past elections to the post have often been bitterly contested.

If China vetoed the re-election of Kurt Waldheim in 1981, the Clinton Administration denied Mr Boutros-Boutros Ghali the second term in 1996, leading to the emergence of Mr Kofi Annan as a compromise candidate.

The Chinese veto of Kurt Waldheim in 1981 was coupled with a US veto of the candidature of Tanzania's Salim Ahmed Salim. It was the Chinese veto that led to Mr Javier Perez de Cuellar emerging a compromise candidate in 1981.

Now, Japan is not enthusiastic about South Korea's candidature and the Thai Deputy Prime Minister, who has the backing of China and Pakistan, does not appear to enjoy Western support.

New Delhi should also bear in mind that there is widespread feeling including in the US that the new Secretary-General should come from an East Asian country, with credentials that make him acceptable to both the US and China.

We also need to remember that on issues involving the UN Security Council, the US and China will not hesitate to work together, if necessary, to undermine our candidature.

This happened last year, when following a meeting between the Permanent Representatives to the UN of the US and China in New York, the two countries together torpedoed the joint bid by Germany Japan, India and Brazil for a permanent membership to the UN Security Council. Should such joint efforts by the US and China lead to the emergence of a statesman like Singapore's former Prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, as a compromise candidate, India would be well advised to withdraw Mr Tharoor's candidature.

Democratisation of UN

The decision to nominate Mr Tharoor led to India being forced to back off from a major proposal that it was championing for "democratisation" of the UN.

This proposal, which had widespread support, would have involved empowering the UN General Assembly rather than the unrepresentative Security Council with a decisive say in the election of the UN Secretary-General. Mr Tharoor, an articulate and well-read person and a prolific writer, does not enjoy the same support that persons like Kofi Annan and Perez de Cuellar enjoyed in the past.

It is also not clear what precise national interest was to be served by nominating him for the post of UN Secretary-General. As an international civil servant, Mr Tharoor quite rightly proclaimed that while he is grateful to the Government of India for nominating him, he will (if elected) be "an Indian Secretary General" and not "India's Secretary General".

The manner in which Mr Tharoor's candidature was initiated gives one an uneasy feeling that there is a lack of coherence and careful consideration in decision-making on serious issues of national security and foreign policy. Whether it is on Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Iran, West Asia, or even on issues of terrorism, domestic political considerations now appear to play a far greater role, than ever witnessed in the past.

(The author is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan.)

More Stories on : People | Foreign Relations

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Fuel in the cell

Half-dose will not do

Strengthening the competition culture

International Energy Agency report — India must plug into China's approach

Mood and workplace

Sri Lankan Govt needs strategic vision to resolve conflict

Saga of India's bid for UN Secretary-General's post

Cola controversy