US in the UN

1. 5/4/23, 11:15 AM
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Page 1 of 6
https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/yEvEYL
https://www.usip.org /publications/2022/03/rethinking-us-engagement-un-context-ukraine-part-two
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the
Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Four recommendations for using U.S. leadership to reinvigorate multilateral
diplomacy.
Thursday, March 31, 2022 / By: Andrew Cheatham
Editor’s Note: Read part one of this series on renewing U.S. engagement in
multilateral institutions.
Russia’s war in Ukraine is a salient reminder of the world’s vulnerabilities to the
potential cataclysmic impact of modern warfare. Russia’s nuclear arsenal, the
world’s largest, is one of the underlying reasons why its actions in Ukraine
have gone unchecked directly by NATO forces. Amid these threats, rules-
based international institutions such as the United Nations have long been
crucial to peaceful conflict prevention and resolution — but their effectiveness
has been hampered in recent years by the United States’ withering
commitment to multilateralism.

2. 5/4/23, 11:15 AM
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Page 2 of 6
https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/yEvEYL
President Biden departs after addressing the 76th Session of the U.N. General Assembly
at the U.N. headquarters in New York. September 21, 2021. (Doug Mills/The New York
Times)
Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Should Drive the U.S. to
Reinvest in U.N. System
In this context, the U.N.’s main organ of hard power, the Security Council, is left
powerless with Russia’s guaranteed veto as a permanent member. For cynics,
this adds to the argument that the U.N. is toothless and obsolete. But rather, it
should be a reason to deepen engagement and work to adapt the U.N. — the
best mechanism for global security that humankind has ever known — to
reflect the world as it is in 2022 rather than 1945.
As mentioned in part one, the Biden administration has been reengaging with
the U.N. system following several rapid withdrawals in recent years. Much of
the work of the Biden administration started straight away, including rejoining
the U.N. Human Rights Council and the Paris Climate Agreement, expanding
support for COVAX and rejoining the World Health Organization, as well as
committing to a national budget with fully assessed dues and the partial
repayment of U.N. peacekeeping arrears.

3. 5/4/23, 11:15 AM
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Page 3 of 6
https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/yEvEYL
Using the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a catalyst, there might now be an
opportunity to pivot from being “back at the table” to a more proactive strategy
of multilateral renewal and strengthening. Despite the prospect of continued
gridlock in the Security Council, renewed U.S. leadership now could
significantly increase the effectiveness of the U.N. system to meaningfully
address the world’s most pressing peace and security challenges. Below are
some recommendations that might support that approach:
Rebuild Case for U.S. Leadership in the U.N. System
Using America’s largely unified position on Ukraine, we should rebuild the case
for U.S. leadership in the U.N. system. American leadership in the international
system is considerably stronger when we stand united, and the Ukraine crisis
puts into stark focus the consequences of letting the international system
atrophy. Some of the pillars of the argument should include:
Great power competition: It is easily forgotten that the post-World War II
international order was modeled on U.S. values and rights, enshrined in
the U.N. Charter and brought about one of the most prosperous periods
of human history. Those values are now under threat by Russia, China
and other rising authoritarian powers who seek to reshape the
international system — including the U.N. — in their image. It is critical
that the United States holds the line within the U.N. system and continues
to build a broad coalition of states to defend and advance these values
against a growing authoritarian onslaught.
Conflict Management: While U.N. peacekeepers are often in the news for
their challenges, evidence of their effectiveness is clear and compelling:
Peacekeeping works and is a remarkably sound investment for U.S.
taxpayers relative to direct U.S. or allied military engagement in conflicts
around the globe. And peacekeeping is not the only mechanism at the
U.N.’s disposal to mitigate and contain a conflict. U.N. political and
specialized agencies are often on the front lines of responses to conflicts,
as they are in Ukraine.

4. 5/4/23, 11:15 AM
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Page 4 of 6
https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/yEvEYL
Global burden-sharing: Though imperfect, the U.N.’s system for
assessing dues helps spread the cost across all member states based on
their relative economic size. This global burden-sharing is unique in
history and underappreciated domestically. While the United States
continues to shoulder the burden of the largest percentage of U.N. dues,
it is a relatively low percentage (less than one-third) and is a mere
pittance in comparison to the cost of direct U.S. or allied military
engagement. The U.N. system remains the best, and indeed only,
mechanism to ensure that the international community — U.S. allies and
adversaries alike — share the burden of maintaining global peace and
security.
Pursue U.N. Security Council Reform
Next, the United States should lead an international coalition to consider
options for Security Council reform. Russia’s ability to veto any meaningful
Security Council action has renewed longstanding calls to reconsider the
conditions of the Security Council, including the body’s membership and under
what conditions permanent members can (or should) be able to use their veto
power.
Security Council reform has historically been the third rail of international
politics, with the status quo winning out. But Russia’s flagrant war of
aggression in Ukraine has laid bare just how starkly the current power
imbalances at the U.N. are at odds with 2022 geopolitical and normative
realities. And while those imbalances have long hampered the Security
Council’s effectiveness, the current situation may threaten to break it entirely.
That’s why we should put serious ideas for reform back on the table. The
issues plaguing the Security Council are not due to innate flaws, as some
critics might contend, but rather with a reticence to incorporate how
international power dynamics have shifted over the body’s lifespan.
The Ukraine crisis offers a chance for us to update the Security Council in a
way that rectifies these imbalances and generates collective goodwill among
member states. In particular, the United States could demonstrate its
commitment to multilateralism by considering options for substantive changes

5. 5/4/23, 11:15 AM
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Page 5 of 6
https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/yEvEYL
in membership, including by adding more permanent members from the
“Global South,” particularly leading states from Africa and Latin America, who
continue to demand a greater voice in international decision-making.
The United States could also seek to adjust the conditions under which
permanent members can exercise their veto, including by strengthening the
conditions when belligerent states must recuse themselves from Security
Council decisions and considering stronger measures to prevent the use of the
veto in situations credibly determined to involve mass atrocities or crimes
against humanity. While this would entail reforming the United States’ veto
power as well, such a concession could be used to signal the seriousness of
our efforts to reinvigorate the U.N. system.
Given the vagaries of the existing U.N. Charter, any reform effort is likely to
stall — amendments to the U.N. Charter require a two-thirds majority vote in
the General Assembly, and ratification by two-thirds of all member states,
including all permanent members of the Security Council. However, this
moment is an opportunity to show good faith and signal a shift in the exercise
of American power.
Strengthen Other U.N. Mechanisms for Peace and
Security
In the absence of substantive reform, stasis could be the norm in the Security
Council for the foreseeable future. In that case, it’s possible to work around the
Security Council to meaningfully address salient peace and security
challenges. While the United States should not stop making every effort to
influence Security Council deliberations on critical peace and security issues —
including Syria, Myanmar and Ethiopia — it should aim to strengthen
mechanisms of multilateral conflict prevention and resolution that don’t require
Security Council unanimity. The recent U.S.-U.N. Re-Engagement Roundtable
series offered some recommendations for accomplishing this, including
increasing funding for the U.N. Peacebuilding Fund, special political missions
and resident coordinator work in fragile states.
Build a Stronger System of International Accountability

6. 5/4/23, 11:15 AM
Rethinking U.S. Engagement with U.N. in the Context of Ukraine: Part Two
Page 6 of 6
https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/yEvEYL
The United States should also strengthen the international legal architecture to
deter future crimes of aggression. With some calling for the need to prosecute
Putin as a war criminal, the International Criminal Court has rarely had a
moment of such strong support. To be sure, accountability for Russia’s war in
Ukraine will be critical not only to the terms of an eventual peace settlement
there, but also to deter future crimes of aggression. The United States has
always had a complicated relationship with the ICC, and while ratification of the
Rome Statute is likely a non-starter domestically, there are a number of steps
that the United States can take to strengthen the court and the growing
network of accountability mechanisms in Ukraine:
Take a forward-leaning approach to intelligence declassification and
sharing with international prosecutors and fact-finding commissions and
ask our “Five Eyes” partners to do the same.
Support grassroots efforts to collect open-source data as evidence of
international crimes.
Augment the capacity of international proceedings and investigations.
This would involve possibly seconding Department of Justice or other
Federal justice staff to various international criminal courts (not
necessarily the ICC) — similar to the Nuremburg and Tokyo trials after
WWII, where U.S. officials served as judges and defense council,
respectively.
Increase credibility through continuing sound congressional and military
investigations into alleged U.S. violations of international law (e.g., illegal
detention and torture), limiting any room for the International Criminal
Court’s complementarity jurisdiction.
Andrew Cheatham and a senior expert in the Executive Office where he
advises on issues programs, policies and field operations.
Type: Analysis and Commentary