The seeds of international anarchy

Sri Lanka should find it exceedingly encouraging that sections of the Non-aligned Movement are firmly behind it in the face of the pressure the West is seeking to bring on it at the ongoing UNHRC sessions. In this commentary we have time and again been stressing the need for organizations, such as NAM, that profess to be champions of the rights and legitimate interests of the developing world, to rally round Sri Lanka at this trying moment. We are glad that these urgings have been heeded.

While, theoretically, the UN Charter is in force and is alluded to by significant sections of global opinion as constituting the international legal framework within which inter-state relations are conducted, in practical, real life terms this is not always so. For instance, it need hardly be stressed that issues in international law and order are to a large extent resolved by consensus by the five permanent UN Security Council members, whereas in a world which is believed to be home to a multitude of liberal democracies, it is the opinion of the majority of states which should count.

Needless to say, the vast majority of humans live in the developing world and the views of the latter should be reflected clearly in UN decisions affecting particularly law and order and global economic issues, but this is not always the case. In other words, it is the will of the more powerful members of the UN that ultimately prevails. Therefore, while the theoretical position is that we live in an equal world, the opposite turns out to be usually true.

It is against this highly unequal global power structure that it has fallen to Sri Lanka's lot to protect its dignity and sovereignty in the bodies of the UN, specifically the UNHRC. It must be clearly underscored that Sri Lanka has no quarrel whatsoever with the UN. Sri Lanka has, and will remain, respectful of the UN and an absolutely law-abiding member of the international community. On this score, no one would need to entertain any reservations.

However, the issue of UN reform has to be revisited and re-examined particularly in view of the highly skewed contemporary global power structure and its consequences for the less powerful member states of the UN. Clearly, countries, such as, India and Brazil, to consider just two such competent candidates, need to be in the more pivotal bodies of the UN, such as, the Security Council, but there seems to be strong resistance to their speedy admission to the key organ. Interestingly, UN reform itself does not seem to be a hot topic any longer.

However, it is plain to see that some of the vital interests of the Third World are going unaddressed because the opinion that should count is not represented or is underrepresented in the more important organs of the UN system. This fundamental weakness or inequity in the UN system should be rectified as a matter of urgency and we hope the international community would sooner rather than later do what is needed with regard to UN reform.

Meanwhile, the possibilities are that the seeds of anarchy would be increasingly sown by the more overwhelming power wielders in the international system. Such anarchy takes the form of international disorder resulting from resistance on the part of the mighty to ignore or disregard the dictates of International Law. In other words, by these powers taking the law into their hands and flouting in the process, the Rule of Law.

These deleterious tendencies could be promoted even in the present instance by sections of the international community attempting to deride Sri Lanka in the UNHRC on the basis of nebulous and hazy allegations that do not stand up to rigorous rational and judicial scrutiny. Whereas quite a few of these mighty fault-finders are number one violators of international legal principles, they would be only steadily undermining global law and order by acting unjustly; in this instance in relation to Sri Lanka which needs to be given time to implement the LLRC report, besides being given the opportunity to rejuvenate itself in these post-conflict times.

So, nothing positive will be achieved by these major powers acting arrogantly towards countries such as Sri Lanka which should be treated with consideration, now that it is bent on building a new future. The high-handed conduct by the mighty would only strengthen the perception among volatile sections that the present international order is not just. Accordingly, they would be encouraging violence on the part of those who erroneously arrive at the conclusion that in the present order, 'anything goes.' However, Sri Lanka will remain faithful to International Law and all that is considered sacred by the law-abiding.