Threats and Smugness Out of Place in the Modern World

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

Britain at the UN:
Threats and Smugness Out of Place in the Modern World

The 62nd session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which is currently meeting in New York, should be the occasion when all 192 members of the UN come together to exchange opinions and deliberate on the common problems facing humanity, as befits a body that is “the chief deliberative, policy-making and representative organ of the United Nations”. The recent General Debate of the General Assembly has indeed been the occasion for days of speeches by world leaders, from countries large and small. But what appears in stark relief is the fact that different countries approach the UN and the world’s problems in very different ways.

            Many small countries used the occasion to stress particular local or regional problems, or global environmental or economic problems that had a particular impact on them. The US, Britain and some of the other big powers, on the other hand, used the occasion to lecture, issue threats and bully others, while demanding that everyone subscribe to their particular “universal values”, concerning the multiparty system and representative democracy.

            David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, used the occasion of his speech to the General Assembly to echo many of the sentiments earlier presented by George W Bush when he made his address. He threatened both Iran and Zimbabwe, just as Bush had previously when the US president presented himself as the most zealous defender of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Miliband’s first words were to demand that the Palestinian people subject themselves to a future that they themselves have not chosen and allow others to decide their fate, a proposal which negates both the spirit and letter of the Universal Declaration.

            Indeed, the speeches presented by the US and Britain were remarkably similar in both tone and content, despite efforts by Gordon Brown’s government to create the impression that it is distancing itself in some way from the US. While Bush presented the US as the greatest defender of the ideals of the UN and democracy, and a zealous opponent of poverty and underdevelopment, the representative of the British government proceeded to lecture the world on global poverty, as though this phenomenon had nothing to do with global capitalism in general and neo-liberal globalisation in particular, as championed by the Anglo-American alliance. For Miliband, inequality also “fuels extremism” and “undermines support for an open global economy”. But his solutions for world poverty are “open markets” and “democratic and transparent institutions”, further privatisation and penetration by monopoly capital, a continuation of the world order and very institutions that have created and maintain the glaring inequalities that exist in the world. Where these institutions and markets don’t exist, Miliband proposes even greater intervention, led by the UN if that is convenient, as in Darfur, but led more openly by the Anglo-American alliance, if necessary, as in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although the Foreign Secretary made reference to the UN Charter, there is nothing in the government’s foreign policy which recognises the “sovereign equality of states”, or the “equal rights and dignity of mean and women and of nations great and small”.

            The Labour government which arrogantly lectures others on the growing divide between rich and poor within countries, does not even address the causes and consequences of poverty in Britain, one of the world’s richest countries, where one third of all children exist below the poverty line and, according to the recent report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, one quarter of all children leave school either with no qualifications, or with only the future prospect of unemployment and criminal activity. The Labour government which lectures the world on the need for an arms trade treaty, acts as the agent of the armaments monopolies such as BAE Systems all over the world and is currently embroiled in corruption scandals and legal cases as a consequence.

            The approach of the US and Britain to the issue of global issues was is in stark contrast to many of the other countries as the speeches of the representatives of Cuba, Venezuela, DPR of Korea, Iran and other countries made clear. They rejected the so-called “universal values” of the Anglo-American alliance and made it clear that it was the very economic system and political institutions championed by Britain, the US and the other big powers that are the root cause of the problems facing humanity, while the interference of the big powers far from solving these problems, as they claim, entrenches and further exacerbates them. At the same time, the domination of the UN Security Council by Britain and the other big powers has, in many cases turned the UN into merely an instrument of the their hegemony.

            The times therefore cry out for a new foreign policy for Britain. A total break with the hypocrisy and arrogance that accompanies the government’s military aggression and interference across the globe, in alliance with US imperialism. Britain must cease such interference and remove and bring all its troops home. Britain’s colonial and neo-colonial relationships which keep so many countries in poverty must be ended. There is also an urgent need for the genuine democratisation of the UN Security Council and the recognition of the equality of all countries. This is the new foreign policy demanded by the working class and people of Britain and one which must be fought for as part of the struggle for a new society. We call on the working class and people to seriously take up the fight for this programme and settle scores with the arrogance of British chauvinism exhibited by the likes of Miliband and Brown.