The Week in Multilateralism

Friday, July 14, 2023

Breakthroughs and (Near) Breakdowns at the NATO Summit

NATO’s closely watched meeting in Vilnius, Lithuania opened with news that Turkey had finally relented in its opposition to Sweden’s membership. That shift seemed to clear the way for Sweden to become the alliance’s 32nd member. As the week wore on, however, it became clear that Stockholm’s green light was not lit just yet. Turkish president Recep Erdogan clarified that Turkey’s lawmakers would have to formally approve the change, a step that likely would not be taken until October.

Ukraine was, of course, the focal point of the gathering, and the key question was whether the alliance would offer the embattled country membership—or at least a clear path to it. The answer was no, with the United States and Germany reportedly the most reticent. The leaders’ final communique ended up with the tautological formulation that Ukraine would be offered membership when alliance members could agree to do so.

That unsatisfactory result for Kyiv produced high-level drama when Ukrainian president Volodomyr Zelensky vented his frustration online. Via the Washington Post account:

Zelensky’s missive, launched as NATO leaders were gathering for the two-day summit, denounced as “unprecedented and absurd” what was then a draft of the membership language.

The Ukrainian leader’s public rebuke of the alliance stunned those assembled in the summit venue, an exposition hall on the outskirts of the Lithuanian capital, leaving the U.S. delegation “furious,” according to one official familiar with the situation. Like others, the person spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive talks.

There were other intriguing developments as the NATO leaders met, including between the alliance and partners in Asia. The summit spawned a sideline bilateral confab between Japanese and Korean leaders. And there were fresh commitments to NATO-Japan cooperation. The Japan Times offered this assessment of the new steps:

Japan and NATO have ushered in a new era in bilateral relations with the completion of a deal that will see Tokyo step up cooperation with the world’s most powerful military alliance in several additional areas, amid shared concerns over Russia and China. Collaboration will go beyond traditional security areas and extend to cyber, emerging and disruptive technologies and strategic communications…

Reportedly because of French opposition, however, the alliance pulled up short of establishing a liaison office in Japan.

From Discord to Unanimity

Russia this week cast the Security Council’s first veto of 2023. The no vote scuppered a resolution on humanitarian aid to northwest Syria that had the support of thirteen Council members (China abstained on the measure). Russia has been by far the most frequent user of the Council’s controversial veto power in recent years, with the Syria conflict being a frequent source of discord. As in the past, the Russian ambassador described his vote as a defense of Syria’s right to control its own borders.

Moscow’s move provoked outrage from Western countries and humanitarian organizations, but there were indications that the veto’s impact on the ground might be limited, at least for now; the Syrian government reportedly approved continued aid shipments in the area.

And in a sign that the Council is still far from irretrievably paralyzed, the week ended with a unanimous resolution on Haiti. It extended the mandate of the UN’s political mission there, encouraged countries to bolster Haiti’s flagging police force, and assigned the Secretary General the thankless task of providing options for pulling the country out of its spiral.

(For a cogent analysis of current, complicated Council dynamics, see this new piece from the International Crisis Group’s Richard Gowan.)

Can the World Trade Organization’s “Crown Jewel” Be Saved?

Writing in The Hindu (paywalled), scholar Prabhash Ranjan makes a plea for member states to rescue the WTO’s frozen dispute resolution system. “The appellate body,” he writes, “is non-functional because the United States, singlehandedly, has blocked the appointment of new members.”

I’ve argued here previously that the paralysis of the WTO’s quasi-judicial system is one of the most consequential ongoing developments for the multilateral architecture. And it’s one area where the Biden administration has followed rather than reversed the Trump administration’s attacks on multilateral structures deemed hostile to U.S. interests.

The United States recently released a statement on WTO reform, but it lacked an actionable statement of what the U.S. wants and there is little evidence that the standoff will be resolved. In a sign of mounting frustration, the European Union this week announced that it would seek enforcement measures against Indonesia when that country appealed a negative ruling to the frozen Appellate Body (a tactic known as appealing “into the void”). The WTO system for resolving trade disputes—and avoiding tit-for-tat trade restrictions—is unraveling fast.

A Human Rights Council Divided

The UN’s Human Rights Council this week approved a resolution criticizing desecration of religious symbols. The resolution was prompted by a performative burning of the Quran in Sweden and called on states “to adopt national laws, policies and law enforcement frameworks that address, prevent and prosecute acts and advocacy of religious hatred that constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and to take immediate steps to ensure accountability.”

The measure secured 28 positive votes, but it split the Council sharply along regional lines. Almost all western members voted against (except for Ukraine, interestingly) while the text commanded the support of Middle Eastern, African, and Asian members, including heavyweights China, India, and South Africa. The UN’s own high commissioner for human rights, Volker Türk, offered remarks that seemed to support the resolution.

Kampala and the Court

Uganda’s long and strange history with the International Criminal Court (ICC) took another turn.

Nearly two decades ago, in a breakthrough moment for what was then a brand new court, Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni asked the ICC to investigate atrocities committed in his country by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). That request led to one of the court’s first formal investigations, which eventually yielded charges against several LRA leaders.

But the relationship between Museveni’s regime and the court has deteriorated badly in the years that followed. Uganda’s leaders grew frustrated with the sluggish pace of the investigation, and Museveni eventually became one of the African leaders accusing the court of neo-colonialism and bias against Africa. He even joined calls for African countries to abandon the institution.

This week brought news that regime opponents have filed with the ICC evidence documenting a pattern of abuse by Ugandan leaders. Via The Guardian:

The submissions contain detailed allegations of the torture of opposition figures and activists who report being arrested arbitrarily and being held incommunicado in “torture centres”, where they were reportedly interrogated about their links with the opposition figure Bobi Wine and subjected to physical harm and indignifying treatment.

Museveni will now have fresh cause for animosity toward The Hague.

---

Briefly Noted:

• ASEAN members pledged to (absolutely, definitely, and without a hint of doubt) finalize a long-awaited Code of Conduct for the South China Sea by 2026.

• From BRICS to BRICSE? Ethiopia wants to join the BRICS, the informal grouping that now comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

• Should the African Union become a member of the G20?

• A new decision by the International Court of Justice means that Nicaragua has come up empty in its maritime dispute with Colombia.

• The World Health Organization is coming for your Diet Coke.

---

New Publications of Interest:

• From the European Council on Foreign Relations comes a new set of papers on the shape of the multilateral system.

• Academics Joost Pauwelyn and Krzysztof Pelc have released a new analysis of whether World Trade Organization decisions are biased.