The Week in Multilateralism
Friday, September 16, 2022
Checking on the P5 Privilege at the World Court
The United States has nominated prominent legal scholar Sarah Cleveland for a judgeship at the International Court of Justice. The fifteen ICJ judges are selected jointly by the UN Security Council and the General Assembly and serve nine-year terms. Cleveland brings a sparkling resume to the coming multilateral election campaign:
Professor Cleveland has a long and distinguished career in the service of international law, including as a professor of international law, as the Counselor on International Law in the Department of State’s Office of the Legal Adviser (2009-2011), and as Vice Chair and member of the UN Human Rights Committee (2015-2018).
Cleveland has another attribute that will almost certainly seal the deal—she’s American. And an American has always served as a judge since the ICJ opened its doors in 1946. That tradition is part of a broader custom at the United Nations that has accorded permanent Security Council members judgeships. The deference given to the P5 is a matter of comity rather than regulation, however, and the veto power does not apply to voting on judgeships.
What’s more, this traditional P5 privilege is less solid than it used to be. Britain’s candidate for a judgeship lost out to an Indian candidate in 2017. As the BBC noted in its reporting at the time, the episode was at least in part a rebellion by the broader UN membership against what are perceived as the exorbitant privileges of the permanent Council members:
[Britain’s defeat] reflects a shift in the balance of power at the UN away from the Security Council. Many members on the General Assembly resent the way the Security Council has so much power, particularly the five permanent members.
The so-called Group of 77 - which represents a coalition of mostly developing nations - has long been pushing for greater influence. The victory of India over the UK will be seen as a huge success for the G77 in pushing back against the traditional northern powers on the security council.
The United States is very unlikely to suffer the same kind of rebuff, but it will not be lost on many countries that the superpower does not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ and has over the years withdrawn from a number of treaties that allowed for jurisdiction over the United States. Some UN members may well ask why a country that goes to great lengths to shield itself from the court’s reach deserves a judgeship.
Russia may have even more to worry about when it comes to future ICJ elections. The term of the current Russian judge, Kirril Gevorgian, expires in 2024. Absent political change in Moscow its next candidate will likely face a skeptical UN membership.
Tehran to Shanghai
The Russia and China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) has been holding its annual summit this week in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. The confab allowed for a much commented on bilateral meeting between Russian president Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping and it is also facilitating an encounter between Xi and Indian prime minister Narendra Modi.
Even as the SCO offers a forum for major-power consultations, the organization is set to expand its ranks. In advance of the summit, Iran took another step toward full membership in the grouping. Iran’s president described the move as part of a broader effort to circumvent US-imposed economic isolation:
Last year, the rapidly expanding SCO approved Iran’s application for accession, while the government in Tehran called on members to help it form a mechanism to avert sanctions imposed by the West over its disputed nuclear programme.
“The relationship between countries that are sanctioned by the US, such as Iran, Russia or other countries, can overcome many problems and issues and make them stronger,” Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi told his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, during a meeting in Samarkand.
“The Americans think whichever country they impose sanctions on, it will be stopped, their perception is a wrong one.”
Congo, Conflict, and Compensation
The conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) that raged between 1998 and 2003 was sometimes described as “Africa’s world war.” It involved a half dozen countries and cost several hundred thousand lives. Two decades after (much of) the fighting ended, questions of guilt, justice, and compensation are slowly being sorted out in international courts.
This week, the government of Uganda paid the first tranche of internationally-mandated compensation to the DRC. The requirement grew out of a 1999 ICJ case in which the DRC accused Uganda of conducting illegal military activities on its territory. In 2005, the court ruled that Uganda had in fact violated Congolese sovereignty, and that Congo had never consented to the presence of most Ugandan troops. Fifteen years later, the court finally ordered Uganda to pay $225 million in compensation.
Even as the ICJ process moved forward, a separate international compensation proceeding involving the DRC hit a snag. The appeals chamber of the International Criminal Court this week rejected a trial chamber ruling that ordered former warlord Bosco Ntaganda to pay a group of victims $30 million. (In 2019, ICC judges found Ntaganda guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the Ituri region between 2002 and 2003.) The appeals chamber cited problems with how the trial chamber had classified his victims and how it calculated reparations. The matter now goes back to the trial chamber for further consideration.
Brazil’s Road to the Rich-World Club
As Brazil hurtles toward what may be a turbulent election, the country’s slow journey to the world’s exclusive club of advanced economies continues apace. A new analysis of Brazil’s bid to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development offers context on the process:
Brazil could be the first BRIC country to join the OECD. As stated by Mr. Paulo Guedes, Brazil’s Minister of Economy, Brazil is the only country that is set to be a member of three major institutional bodies focused on global economy – G-20, BRICS and the OECD.
Briefly noted:
As the UN General Assembly convenes in New York, the International Crisis Group outlines ten challenges for the world organization.
Party’s Over: After announcing its intention to withdraw earlier this year, Russia is as of this week no longer a party to the European Convention on Human Rights.
The United States has established a Switzerland-based fund for frozen Afghan central bank money. It appears that the fund will be used in part to keep Afghanistan current on obligations to international financial institutions, including the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
In Geneva, the UN Human Rights Council opened its fifty-first session. The meeting comes as the top UN human rights job changes hands and amidst controversy regarding UN reporting on human rights in China.
The Sydney Morning Herald reports on “the most important election you’ve never heard of”: the selection this month of a new chief of the International Telecommunications Union.
An Alliance at Sea: Twelve NATO countries conducted maritime exercises off the coast of Turkey. Meanwhile, personnel from alliance countries are gathering in Portugal for a training session on the use of unmanned vessels.
Could U.S. anti-inflation measures break World Trade Organization rules? The European Union thinks so.
Tamari Kazutochi offers a Japanese perspective on the Quad and its future challenges.