Opinions and
comments have lingered in the minds of many political analysts and
observers whether Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma is the next viable UN
Secretary General (UNSG). With the office tenure of the incumbent
UNSG expires in December 2006, there have been
diplomatic campaigns launched by several contending candidates for
the top post of the world highest body. One among them is Thailand
Deputy Prime Minister Surakiart Sathirathai, a Harvard-trained
lawyer. According to the UN Charter, the Secretary General is to be
appointed by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the 15
Security Council members. However, practically speaking, the P5
(Britain, China, France, Russia and United States) ultimately
remains the deciding factor.
Traditionally, the UN top post is given to
relatively lesser power country which has less rivals –
specifically with the five permanent members. If this has to be taken into
account, the next UN chief will hail either from Asia or Africa. As appeared
on the 26th November 2005 issue of the Washington Post newspaper,
"Asians contend that the next secretary general should come from their
region because an Asian has not held the job since 1971, when U Thant of
Burma completed a 10-year term. Russia and China agree, but the Bush
administration opposes the concept of regional rotation and has urged
aspirants from around the world to compete."
Therefore, it is unambiguous to tone the
likelihood of the next UN chief will be from Asia. Moreover, it is also
important to note that a candidate, in one way or another, has to have the endorsement of his or her country. Indeed, the post has become one of the world's most prestigious
titles especially after the cold war era. Theoretically, UN Secretary
General is the head of one hundred and ninety one (191) UN member countries.
Comparatively speaking, the UN has proven itself to be much more realistic
and responsible than ever before.
In one of my International Relations class
during my Master's Program in the U.S., my professor was very critical about
the role of the United Nations permanent powers. He contended that the
former "League of Nations" was much more democratic than the "United
Nations." He cited how the world body, at times, has been hijacked by the
five permanent members. At the League of Nations, it used to be done with
consensus. There is no doubt about the controversial nature of it.
Proponents say that the P5 are the police officers policing the flow of the
UN, while critics argue that there should be a body to control the abuse of
power by the P5.
Basing our analysis on the above given
circumstances, it is unlikely that Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma, recipient of
the 1991 Nobel Peace prize for her non-violent struggle for democracy and
human rights, will be given
the top UN post. At first, even if supported by the United States, Great
Britian and France, the endorsement of other Security Council members is
doubtful. Moreover, the SPDC (the Burmese military regime) is unlikely to
project her to represent Burma at the world body. Even if the SPDC thinks
this could be a chance to get rid her from the country, the consent of Aung
San Suu Kyi, who is held incommunicado, remains unanswered. A simple fact
may be noted that the ruling military generals will be delighted to see her
leaving the country (instance of her husband's death can be cited here). Additionally, there are other qualified
contenders queuing.
For comments, the writer can be reached at
nehginpao@yahoo.com.
Posted on January 07, 2006
