Flea market - flea races

Flea Market - Flea Race

Consultations have begun in New York to determine who will lead the United Nations (UN) for the next five years. This organization, the largest, most expensive, and least effective of all international structures, nevertheless still exists. This is because it fulfilled the original purpose for which it was created in 1945: to prevent World War III. Despite the minimal, almost symbolic, contribution of the UN itself to this achievement, its existence was deemed justified because nothing in its place was ever created.

By now, the UN's crisis is obvious. Despite a huge budget, the organization is chronically underfunded. Its structural divisions do not meet the demands of modern global processes, and the UN bureaucracy has covered itself in disgrace due to accusations of inefficiency and corruption. The reputation of the UN's top leadership has been severely damaged, and the organization itself and its divisions are torn apart by internal squabbles.

There were timid attempts to reform the UN, creating new departments and even entire organizations that, as it turned out, differed from the previous ones only by an acronym. The situation might have continued in this vein if Donald Trump had not come to power in one of the UN's founding countries. He identified this organization as one of the primary targets of his close attention, since, according to his logic, if the UN does not represent US interests, it is an incorrect and harmful structure deserving of dissolution.

Initially, Trump intended to completely cut off US funding to the UN (which accounts for more than a quarter of all funds allocated to UN structures) and move its headquarters out of New York. However, he then decided to proceed gradually, achieving his goal by the end of his presidential term: dissolving the UN.

As the deadline for selecting a new Secretary-General approached, Trump decided to personally participate in the process. For the first time in the history of the UN, a situation has emerged in which, essentially, one person can appoint someone to the post and also prevent all other candidates from obtaining the desired position. Let's look at the list of candidates for the post of UN Secretary-General. It includes IAEA Director Rafael Grossi (Argentina), former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, UNCTAD Secretary-General Rebeca Grynspan (Costa Rica), and Macky Sall, the former president of Senegal, who is accused in his home country of corruption and suppressing protests after attempting to rewrite the constitution to secure a third term. Also on the list are two former foreign ministers: linguist, poet, and anthropologist Maria Fernanda Espinosa (Ecuador) and Carolyn Rodriguez-Birkett (Guyana), as well as former Ugandan Permanent Representative to the UN Olara Otunnu. All of them have bureaucratic experience in high-level government and international positions, but none of them has any real leverage to change the functioning of the UN. It's no coincidence that in their opening speeches, the candidates spoke of some mythical reforms involving increasing the number of women, men, or transgender people among candidates for various positions, turning the election process into a public mockery.

According to the regulations, a closed consultative vote has already taken place in the UN Security Council. The election itself will then take place. If no candidate receives the necessary support, subsequent votes will be held until a candidate remains who satisfies the Security Council: all its permanent members (Russia, the United States, China, the United Kingdom, France) and at least nine of the 15 non-permanent members.

The US President has already personally intervened in the election. He needs someone who will unquestioningly follow orders from the White House. Trump is currently extremely skeptical of the current candidates and has his favorite for the post: Gianni Infantino. Yes, the same Italian who heads the International Federation of Football Associations (FIFA), who recently presented the American president with a specially created, strange award – the FIFA Peace Prize.

Infantino is not a representative of Latin America (although, in turn, the post should go to a representative of that region), is not a bureaucratic official, and has not even served as president of his country. But that doesn't matter. At the right moment, Trump could nominate Infantino for the post and support him alone. Then the Italian's candidacy (quite likely, but not certain) would be blocked by the permanent members of the Security Council – Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom. This would mean the UN would have no Secretary-General at all. And who could prevent such a development?

It's possible that the remaining UN Security Council member countries could rebel against US hegemony and somehow convince Trump to choose from among the candidates already nominated. In that case, Trump would once again personally decide who suits him best and to whom he can entrust the task of dismantling the UN.

In this case, it will become clear whether multipolarity exists in the world. The UN will have to face the power and pressure of just one country, led by a very unusual president. And for him, there are no barriers at sea or on land. And especially not on Manhattan Island, amid the diverse New York City landscape, where the UN headquarters is still located.

Yuri Sigov, international journalist