While United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was calling for the restructuring of all institutions of international governance, including the U.N., in his opening speech at the 79th General Assembly, Israel was conducting its 800th air sortie against Lebanon and dropping its 2,000th bomb over Lebanon. In the aftermath of Israel’s ongoing attacks, reports state that more than 500 people, including 100 children, were killed in Lebanon.
It is incredibly shameful that, while the occupying Israeli regime was launching indiscriminate attacks on Gaza, it was also causing the deaths of numerous civilians. According to an image in the media, the Israeli regime sent 80 Palestinians it had massacred in a container to the Ministry of Health in Gaza.
In the same speech, Guterres called for peace and a settlement in Ukraine, probably because Ukrainian and Russian troops have suffered many casualties, and more than that number have been wounded. Setting aside other areas of conflict and potential new conflicts without intervention, both so-called wars (Gaza is certainly not a war but a genocide campaign) continue to deepen the very crisis of international legitimacy that Guterres referred to in his speech.
Israel is attacking all the countries around it, just as Nazi Germany did in 1939, slaughtering children, women and civilians indiscriminately, as if it has taken all humanity captive. Russia, too, is openly occupying another country’s territory and pursuing a revisionist dream of an empire.
So what can we expect if the crisis of legitimacy, which Guterres and other leaders often emphasize, is not overcome? Guterres himself gives the answer: “Without reform, disintegration is inevitable. Global institutions will lose legitimacy, credibility and influence.”
The good news about the U.N.’s current legitimacy crisis is that more leaders recognize it than in the past. The bad news is that, with the exception of a few countries –Türkiye being one of the most important – no one knows how to reform the U.N. to overcome the legitimacy crisis. So we have to ask the question: Where are we? We are at the point where the U.N. is dying, and we don’t have a new organization to replace it. Therefore, the best solution is still to reform the U.N. as soon as possible.
U.N. crisis deepens
It is not possible to reduce the U.N. crisis to a single axis, yet it may be possible to describe certain areas. The main problem that everyone agrees on – but only the five permanent members remain silent – is that the distribution of power and geopolitics that emerged after World War II has been frozen for 79 years. In 1945, when the U.N. was established, five countries built a system that would protect their own interests and prevent others from interfering with it, and they protected this system with the veto.
Today, we are faced with a very different picture. The U.S. is no longer a hegemonic power and is far from being flexible enough to control the system on its own. The other permanent members of the U.N. also lack the means to dominate the system. Russia was forced to fight Ukraine on its own territory due to the boomerang effect of its revisionist policy in Ukraine. China, looking for new allies to balance the West under the U.S. blockade, realizes that its economic instruments are not enough to attract allies. France, seeking to strengthen Europe’s strategic autonomy, has lost its dominance over Africa and has been forced to recognize that NATO is the bedrock of European security. Britain, on the other hand, is seeking to reposition itself under the discourse of an ambitious grand strategy like in the previous centuries. More critically, we are a long way from reaching a strategic consensus among the five permanent members of the U.N. Under heavy pressure from the U.S., Britain and France, Russia is about to become China’s junior partner. China suffers from the same situation.
The main conclusion is that the U.N. Security Council can't act together in any international crisis, just as it is difficult for a peace plan to emerge from the U.N. Security Council to end the Russia-Ukraine war. Russia invaded a permanent U.N. member Ukraine. On the other side, the emergence of a decision to stop Israel’s barbarity is impossible in a mechanism of the absolute veto system of which the U.S. and the U.K. are part.
The new world is quite different from the one 79 years ago. No country accepts a hierarchical international order. However, in the face of the structural constraints of the domination of five countries, other countries are demanding a rules-based multipolar world order. Neither the U.S. nor the military and economic power of other members of the U.N. is sufficient to dominate the system on their own. Therefore, there is a need for an arrangement that reflects the multipolar character of the new world order. This need can only be met by reforming the existing system to reflect the parameters of the new geopolitical order.
The situation reflecting the deepening crisis of the U.N. is not limited to the imbalance between the new geopolitical environment and the Security Council structure. Another aspect deepening the U.N.’s legitimacy crisis is the gradual erosion of the rules-based international system. The two ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and the approach and supportive policies of the U.S. and European states toward the Israeli genocide in Gaza, serve to further consolidate the ruleless world order. At the same time, the U.N. is unable to show leadership in any crisis and prevent crises from deepening. It seems the organization has turned into a debating club. Transparency and accountability are no longer synonymous with the U.N.
The summary is exactly as follows: The U.N., which was established to protect the victim against the aggressor, has turned into a structure that binds the arms of the victim and allows the aggressor to punch the victim.
International discontent
We live in a world where there is much talk and little action when it comes to reforming the U.N. Brazil’s President Lula da Silva says that, “The U.N Charter in its current form fails to address some of humanity’s most pressing problems,” and emphasizes that reform should focus on the structure of the General Assembly, its working methods and veto powers. Italian Prime Minister Meloni also emphasized that reform would only be meaningful if it included all, not just some. In fact, this is a very important framework to avoid creating new hierarchies and to create a more inclusive U.N. However, it does not mention what kind of reform road map will be created. India, which surpasses China in population, says that reform is a must and talks about building collective power. From Asia, Indonesia calls for a “comprehensive world order” and “real and true reform.”
Interestingly, French President Emmanuel Macron emphasizes the need for “an order in which this or that country cannot block others, in which countries are duly represented and do so through institutions that are much fairer than the U.N., the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.” This is quite a comprehensive proposal. However, it remains unclear what kind of road map and agenda France has for reform.
Türkiye's call for humanity
Türkiye, on the other hand, is one of the countries with the clearest position in all reform debates. In fact, it takes the lead. This is because President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan addressed the U.N. General Assembly for the 14th time and again emphasized that “the world is bigger than five,” and that a fairer world is possible. President Erdoğan underlines that unless steps are taken for reform, the world will face a more comprehensive crisis and calls for the veto power vested in five countries to be changed as soon as possible. In this sense, the phrase “the world is bigger than five” constitutes the framework of Türkiye’s call for reform and fully reflects the reality of today’s world politics.
As can be seen in Erdoğan’s speech in the context of the 79th General Assembly, a non-hypocritical, non-exclusionary, inclusive and solution-oriented reform stands out as the only solution to create a virtuous world politics. Erdoğan’s call on Gaza is very important at this point. If the U.S. will not stop Gaza, the step to be taken is to establish a new coalition of humanity.
By changing the function of the U.N. General Assembly, which is one of the foundations of Türkiye’s call for reform, this coalition of humanity can be formed, and Israel can be stopped despite the support of the U.S. For this, it is sufficient to pass a sanctions resolution against Israel with a two-thirds majority of the member states in the General Assembly, including political and economic means. This resolution could also spark the reform of the U.N. If this resolution is adopted by a majority and even implemented, its impact would be enormous. The only important thing is that the countries that will adopt this resolution show the courage to form an alliance of humanity.
Türkiye can, and even must, take the lead in building this virtuous stance!
