The United States and the United Nations

Introduction:

There are three things to be grateful for this month. The first is that on Monday the United Nations celebrated its 43rd birthday.

The second is that the UN's Peace-Keeping Forces have won this year's Nobel Peace Prize. This has a great deal of significance to Canada because we have liberally supported these missions in many parts of the world. My own family feels particularly proud because my brother wore the blue beret as a young Lieutenant in the Suez Peace-Keeping Mission in 1957 and was one of the first casualties, so his award must be accepted posthumously.

The third reason for our gratitude is the decision of the General Assembly to overwhelmingly return us to the Security Council. This is a reflection of how we are viewed by our peers around the Globe and is a tribute to Ambassador Yves Fortier and his predecessor, Stephen Lewis.

The Maslow hierarchy of needs identifies, first, physiological needs, such as food and water; then the need for security, shelter, a job, and safety; social needs, acceptance by one's peers; needs of the ego; and self-actualization, a contribution to society. l bring up this hierarchy because it is relevant to the area of the UN in which Ambassador Korn has been working - the economic and Social Council. The council accounts for 80 per cent of the UN's budget. It is concerned with many different issues - including population, children, housing, women's rights, racial discrimination, drugs, crime, social welfare, youth, human environment, food and other economic problems such as trade, transport, industrialization and economic development.

There is another reason why I am particularly pleased to welcome Lester Korn to Toronto today. That is because he is head of the world's largest executive-search firm, Korn/Ferry International, which he cofounded in 1969 and which has over 50 offices around the world. The Ambassador therefore knows something about the importance of people and leadership in today's complex world. Those of us in the executive search business usually dislike being called Head Hunters. l get it all the time but it is hardly an appropriate title for such a public spirited man who has spent so many years in civic and government affairs.

I wish I could list all of his appointments and accomplishments. Here are a few. He was Chairman of the California State Commission of Citizen Participation and Government from 1979 to 1982. He was a special adviser and delegate, UNESCO Inter-Governmental Conference on Education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace, April 1983; and a member of the President's Commission on White House Fellowships. He is on the Board of Overseers at the University of California School of Management; the Board of Trustees of the City of Hope Medical Centre and the Board of Governors of the Cedars Sinai Medical Centre. He was awarded the University of California Alumni Professional Achievement Award of Excellency in 1984 and the National Brotherhood Award of the National Council of Christians and Jews in 1987.

Sir, in this important month for Canada we could not be more honoured than to have you as our guest speaker today.

Lester B. Korn:

I am indeed honoured to be here today to speak before the Empire Club of Canada and I thank you for your invitation. Canada and the United States have a time-honoured tradition of strong co-operation in multilateral diplomacy. It has been my good fortune to have worked closely with the Canadian ambassadors to the United Nations: Ambassador Yves Fortier, Ambassador Paul Laberge and Ambassador Stephen Lewis. Canada plays a strong role at the United Nations and I have been most impressed with the entire Canadian Mission to the UN.

When President Reagan asked me to take a leave of absence as Chairman of Korn/Ferry International and become an American Ambassador, I was indeed honoured. And now, as I return to the private sector, I would like to share with you today some of my perceptions.

As the most recent U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Social and Economic Council and as the U.S. alternate delegate to the 42nd and 43rd general assemblies, I believe that I have witnessed a period marked by the new spirit of co-operation on the world scene. Peace is literally "breaking out all over." And, the United Nations has assumed a more vigourous role as peace-keeper - an idea first advanced by Prime Minister Lester Pearson. The United Nations has also been a supporter of human rights, regaining respect as a viable international organization.

Substantial progress has been made at the UN in four critical areas:

1. Progress in financial and budgetary control and administrative reform to realistically plan for the future to ensure that the money the UN spends is used for peace-keeping and humanitarian goals and not for increases in the UN bureaucracy.

2. Political progress made in such "hot spots" as the IranIraq war and the Afghanistan agreements to restore peace.

3. Social progress is being made in human rights, women's rights, AIDS education and other areas of critical concern to the planet, and much more needs to be done.

4. And on the economic front there is progress with the passage of a resolution on entrepreneurship at the meeting of the Social and Economic Council in August, which endorses private enterprise. In such strong agencies as UNICEF and UN Development Programs, the UN is also making progress.

I would like to share some of my thoughts about the UN's role today, the U.S. 's view of the UN and UN budget and reform efforts with you.

In President Reagan's address to the United Nations General Assembly this September he said of a building in Geneva:

"The Palais Des Nations was the headquarters of the League of Nations - an institution that was to symbolize an end to all war. And yet that institution and its noble purpose ended with the Second World War ... We are here today.... determined that no such fate shall befall the United Nations. We are determined that the United Nations should succeed and serve the cause of peace for humankind."

During my confirmation hearings, I told the U.S. Senate I viewed the United Nations with considerable skepticism but that I believed that if we didn't have a UN we would want to help create one. Believing that the United States must act with vigilance and prudence in this world organization, President Reagan's guidelines to his American Ambassadors to the UN were very clear. I saw my mandate as helping to make the UN more responsive and I believe that we have made great strides toward this goal. I am pleased to tell you that I feel that the climate for the interests of the Western allies in the United Nations is better today than at any time in the last 10 years.

If I may, I would like to discuss the perception of the United Nations in the United States.

Over the years, American participation in the United Nations has been widely criticized domestically because of "U.S. bashing" by member nations, escalating bureaucratic costs and the organization's past record of ineffectiveness on the world scene. But the winds of change have touched the United Nations - in part because the U.S. administration backed by Congress has taken a strong stand in a number of areas.

In response to this anti-American rhetoric and budget increases which were out of control, the United States withheld a portion of its payments to the United Nations in 1987 and 1988. This action followed laws enacted by Congress and has excited a great deal of recent publicity and misunderstanding.

I would like to get the facts straight about our participation in the United Nations.

U.S. efforts at UN reform have their legislative basis in the Kassebaum/Solomon amendment to the State Department Authorization bill. The amendment required the President to sign a determination that administrative and budgetary reforms are taking place within the UN before U.S. payments would be made to the UN. The President did this, and a $15.2million payment was made to the UN on September 14. An additional $28.8 million was paid this month. Most important, $85.6 million of FY 1989 funds have been presented to the UN.

The President will be required by U.S. law to sign an additional determination to release additional FY-89 funds if this year's General Assembly endorses the consensus recommendations of the Committee for Program and Co-ordination on the Secretary General's Budget Outline for 1990-91. In spite of these payments, the U.S. will remain in arrears until Congress appropriates the full funding of a plan to pay off outstanding arrears. President Reagan has directed the U.S. Department of State to develop a plan. This will not occur until next year at the earliest. It is likely that any plan enacted by Congress would reduce the arrears over a period of years.

For all of this, it is important to keep one thing in mind. The United States still is the single largest contributor to the United Nations.

Consider the facts. The United States will spend nearly $1 billion this year for the UN and its specialized agencies. That includes funds for administration as well as voluntary contributions to numerous programs such as UNICEF and the World Health Organization. The U.S. will provide money to fight global drug trafficking, to provide worldwide AIDS education, to help refugees, to further human rights and to promote women's rights.

By withholding a portion of our assessments, the UN Secretariat and the 159 member-nations have agreed unanimously to make a 15-per-cent reduction of staff which we hope will be achieved by the end of 1989. This was a difficult decision but one that was absolutely necessary to ensure that the UN bureaucracy does not devour the funds needed to benefit the world's needy. We hope that money will be spent directly on activities that benefit programs rather than bureaucracy. Improved controls over wasteful and duplicative bureaucratic costs are a major priority for the U.S. Most nations agree with us and Canada has been a leader in this effort.

Another major step forward in the reform effort was the decision in late 1986 to have major decisions on budgetary issues reached by consensus in a small committee.

We also wish to see a simplification of the UN's organization structure. Duplication of work in the subsidiary bodies of the UN can be reduced and eliminated. Where the mandate of a committee has been fulfilled or exhausted, the committee in question should be abolished in order to free resources for higher priority work, with the priority determined by the member states and not by self-perpetuating international bureaucrats.

President Reagan underlined the importance of UN reform to the U.S. when he said: ". . . We see not only progress but also the potential for an increasingly vital role for multilateral efforts and institutions like the United Nations. That is why now more than ever the United Nations must continue to increase its effectiveness through budget and program reform."

In my opinion, reform becomes ever more important as other major peace-keeping operations are added to the UN's responsibilities. Resources have to be found to fund these high priority projects. UN forces are crucial to the cease-fire between Iran and Iraq. There may be UN peace-keeping forces required in Namibia if recent agreements are carried through.

UN member states interested in reform must be watchful of possible reactions within the UN Secretariat that signal that the reform process is complete. The need for efficiency and economy in the UN operations will continue into the foreseeable future. This is one cause that will not go out of style.

As to the role of the UN in the world, the UN has received a

great deal of deserved praise lately. The award of the Nobel Prize to the UN's peace-keeping forces highlighted the constructive role that the UN can play in finding solutions to ongoing and bloody conflicts like Iran-Iraq.

The UN has been instrumental in promoting a settlement in Afghanistan. The Soviet Union has met its target of withdrawing half of its troops from Afghanistan by August 15, but this is no reason to be complacent. All Soviet forces must be withdrawn on schedule so that all Afghans can enjoy their right to genuine self-determination. The U.S. stands ready with the nations of the region and of the world to contribute to the safe return of the millions of refugees and to promote the processes of reconciliation and rebuilding.

In other hot spots, such as Namibia and Angola, the Western Sahara, and in Cambodia, negotiated settlements have been completed or are in process. Parties in these conflicts have looked to the UN to facilitate negotiations.

The UN has done excellent work in three areas of special concern to the U.S. First is the fight against terrorism, second is the World Health Organization's co-ordination and advancement of research into AIDS and third is the fight against drugs.

And so, I believe the UN is moving forward:

1. On the financial front, the continuing budgetary and administrative reform movement of the UN itself points to a new vitality of the organization.

2. On the political front, progress has been made in several troubled areas. The UN worked out the accords for Soviet troop withdrawals from Afghanistan. And, it has mediated the conclusion of the nine-year war between Iran and Iraq, and will provide peace-keeping forces to implement the pending agreement. We have high hopes concerning an agreement in Namibia and Angola. Progress is being made on the Western Sahara, Cambodia and Cyprus. But much still remains to be done in other areas, particularly in winning a fairer hearing for Israel at the United Nations.

3. On the social front, the United Nations is throwing its weight behind Human Rights, Women's Rights and AIDS education - to name just a few critical issues.

4. On the economic front, the United States introduced an Entrepreneurship Resolution in Geneva at the meeting of the Economic and Social Council this summer. The resolution advocates the importance of the creative spirit and economic vigour contributed by entrepreneurs. After heavy lobbying it passed unanimously, and we were greatly assisted by Canada. It was the first U.S. resolution to do so in some time.

When I'm asked by my fellow Americans what I think about the United Nations, this is my message:

Yes, I want Americans to continue to ask what is going on. Yes, I want Americans to understand that many things occurred at the UN in the past that are not in our interests. And the UN is far from perfect now.

Yes, I want the U.S. to fight anti-American actions there. Yes, I want us to remain in the UN to further U.S. objectives. And, yes, I want the UN bureaucracy to become more efficient so that we may resume and continue our financial support in good conscience.

We cannot give up on the United Nations, particularly as progress is made in so many areas. The U.S. and other nations practise diplomacy on a bilateral as well as a multilateral basis. And, if the UN did not exist, we would need to form such an organization. This is especially true now when we need to work so hard on the complex and critical issues facing the planet: Women's Rights, Human Rights, the Environment, World Health and the fight against AIDS, and continued political unrest.

Member nations in the UN need to monitor the UN, criticize it when necessary, but work to make it responsive to all our basic interests. The United States has found that this will be an ongoing process.

There is a spirit of reform that is bringing much needed change to the UN. The tangible results of this have been a greater effectiveness in the UN's peace-keeping and humanitarian missions. The United States has committed to "Reform it - not wreck it."

Let me close by quoting again from President Reagan's address to the United Nations. "Free people blessed by economic opportunity and protected by laws that respect the dignity of the individual are not driven toward war or the domination of others. Here, then, is the way to world peace."

I think that we can all agree with that. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the honour of inviting me to be with you today.

The appreciation of the meeting was expressed by Charles C. Hoffman, President, Business Planning Associates Inc., and a Director of the Empire Club of Canada.