Diplomacy at work

Using the very old and very democratic theatre of the United Nations to help bring peace to a country in the throes of war is often a long, arduous, and sometimes even fruitless process - just ask any of the bleary-eyd UN representetives who have just spent the past few weeks hammering together a peace accord for the Israel/Lebanon conflict. With the United States currently somewhat over-stretched fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, everyone agreed that the UN would be the perfect world body to handle this conflict, and that it would be best to have non-US soldiers perched on the frontline when trying to keep Israel and Hezbollah from each others' throats. Both noble sentiments, to be sure. But the bickering and fighting over the exact wording of the Israel/Lebanon resolution was something of a constant source of either agony (if you were a member of the Arab world), bloody frustration (if you were a close observer of the conflict, and happened to be on the side of peace) or of little consequence (if you happened to be a conservative). The UN Security Council did eventually come to a consensus last Friday, which called for both Israel and Hezbollah to cease fighting, but the process took far longer than it should have, and more people were killed thanks to the delay. Almost a week ago, The New York Times reported the difficult diplomacy ongoing inside UN Security Council.

It all came down to an almost one-hour fight over the wording of one passage in the final communiqué.

While other countries were pushing for a statement that said the group would work toward an “immediate cease-fire,” Ms. Rice insisted on “work immediately” toward a cease-fire. That may be a small point to most people, but it is a huge one diplomatically since it shifts the burden away from an immediate cessation of violence and more toward diplomacy, a shift that also buys Israel more time to keep up its campaign.

Agreeing to use the UN Security Council to help broker a peace deal or prepare a peacekeeping force may be a last resort in the game of international brinkmanship, but that's nothing compared to what we have to sit through once the Security Council actually convenes and begins to brainstorm the exact structure and wording of a resolution. Each country, or rather each country's delegate, armed with a littany of fellow diplomats, comes to the table with their own perfect resolution, which suits their country and its interests to a tea. The attitude brought to the Security Council by its permenant members - the UK, France, the US, Russia and China - is similar to that of a South-East Asian trinket hawker: optomistic, but still willing to bargain to get a sale. Each country knows it's not going to get its resolution through the way they'd like it, but they're equally conscious not to give too much of its resolution away. Some countries - mainly the God-fearing, flag-flying variety - push harder than others in an effort to make sure their resolution, or something as close to it as possible, is chosen. And it's those stubborn countries, who are often fixated on just one or two words, and how those words may be interpreted, that are so often the source deadly delays. Because when it comes to the UN Security Council, it's the words themselves that are so often the difference between life and death.

The UN may have some things in the wrong place - a few corrupt officials here and there, aided by more than a few corrupt businessmen around the globe - but it's still one of the best options for keeping and enforcing the peace we've got. Sometimes it works well, and international diplomacy is able to stemm a what would have been a long and bloody war (the first Iraq war); and sometimes the process is impeded by handwringing while hundreds, or hundreds of thousands die waiting for the UN to assert itself (the Kosovo war). Either way, the UN is a safety net worth keeping. And on this occasion at least I'm glad the Security Council and the countries represented inside it - specifically the United States - had the foresight to catch Israel and Lebanon before they fell too far.