Idaho’s UN influence persists

Two tragic and costly world wars in close succession convinced 50 countries that more communication and, where beneficial, voluntary cooperation might prevent a third. So with peace in mind, on Oct. 24, 1945 they chartered a new, multilateral “United Nations” — its name coined by U.S. President Roosevelt.

Seventy-five years later the U.N. marked its semi-sesquicentennial (dubbed “UN75”) with global, grass-roots conversations, including the Pacific Northwest. Culminating Monday, the General Assembly met to discuss “The Future We Want, the U.N. We Need: Reaffirming our Collective Commitment to Multilateralism.”

What does that have to do with Idaho? Perhaps more than you’d think.

I asked Dr. Bill Smith, director of University of Idaho’s Martin Institute for International Studies — a teaching, research, and outreach organization which studies the causes of war, the conditions for peace, and the international system.

Turns out the institute’s namesake, U of I political science professor Boyd Martin, was tapped by President Truman to help draft the U.N. Charter.

What exactly is “multilateralism”?

“Multilateralism is the idea that countries will come together and discuss their own views on issues, with an eye to harmonizing them for collective action and ideally, mutual benefit. That includes the sovereign right to do what you want — to come together to see if this collective approach is better for the U.S. than an individual approach.”

Some Americans feel the U.N. is untrustworthy. Why do you think that is, and what might you say to them?

“The perception is that any limitation on our sovereignty is a net negative, that no benefit is worth the exchange. I think that it’s less threatening than we may expect. The U.N.’s founding principle is that domestic sovereignty supersedes U.N. decision-making — that’s the cornerstone of the whole organization.

“But the U.N. is not a panacea for all that ails us. Unless you give it permission to come in and do something, it can’t. We can just say no — and that’s it. Which happens all the time, all over the world. Our institutions are strong enough that we often don’t need the U.N.’s help.

“And while several U.N. bodies’ jobs are to ‘name and shame’ countries with human rights, gender equity, or nuclear disarmament issues — it’s a tool that can be levied against us — that doesn’t impact our ability to do what we want.”

In the UN75 online survey, the top three priorities picked by respondents were universal access to health care, solidarity among nations, and rethinking the global economy. Is that a surprising or expected result?

“I’d have expected those results even a year, two or three years ago, not just because of COVID. The main thrust of the U.N. is called sustainable development goals — SDGs. They’re as applicable to North Idaho now as they are to other places.

“Those efforts in the past were conceptualized by richer countries with means and applied to poor countries — ‘let us help you.’ Whereas now the SDGs can be done through official development programs, and are conceptualized and implemented on the local level, so we can all make improvements wherever we are at.

“What’s also interesting about U.N. policymaking today is a shift away from binding international agreements to statements of consensus. [These consensus statements] can be carried out in the best way each country sees fit, to fit each nation’s individual reality.

“We get scared of the U.N. here sometimes — especially things that have ‘agenda’ or ‘action’ in the title, a sense they’re going to come do something to us. That’s not the intent, [although] it sounds ominous. But for the most part now they are non-binding in nature, so that we can just figure out how to engage with it.”

The UN75 theme is a year of dialogue, bringing people together as “a human family.” Is this realistic, and do you see multilateral organizations or their roles changing as a result of this dialogue?

“It has been changing, maybe not fast enough for some, but the arc over the last 20 years is interesting. It’s more diffuse, more consultative. That started in the '90s with nongovernmental organizations. They’ve been there since 1945; their role was more consultative than impactful or collaborative. Since '92 and the Rio Earth Summit, their role increased. Where there’s global meetings of heads of state or diplomats now there are parallel meetings of NGOs. They’re more engaged, not just consultative.

“Our state has a [relatively] bigger role too. We’ve had three U.S. senators who’ve chaired the foreign relations committee — including the current chair, Jim. Risch.”

“We’re a large player for what some would call a ‘small’ state.”

Sholeh Patrick is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network with degrees in international studies and law. Contact her at Sholeh@cdapress.com.