He could not be expected to make reference to idealistic politics (idealpolitik) considering his position as a political leader and his stance within the current international conjuncture. Qaddafi, however, made recommendations along with harsh criticism. While Qaddafi's speech was a showcase, his criticism was not ungrounded.Arguing that the UN has no dignity and that the Security Council has failed to stop 65 wars, Qaddafi says: “The veto power and existence of permanent members is against the UN Charter. The permanent members treat small countries as second-class states. There is no respect at the UN; the General Assembly has no prestige.” Qaddafi went on to make the following recommendations:
“The superpowers have complicated interests and use the United Nations for their own purposes. The Third World is terrorized and frightened; Africa should be given a seat at the Security Council. Libya cannot be forced to comply with Security Council resolutions. The UN should take democratic decisions; non-adherents to the decisions and resolutions should be expelled from the organization. The rules should apply to powerful countries as well; reliance on military power against another country is contrary to the spirit of the UN. Force is used only when the UN decides it is necessary in times of the violation of the interests of all states. It is too tiring to come to New York; the delegates are tired over here. The US applies strict security measures and visa restrictions. The UN headquarters should be moved out from New York.”
It is a fact that Qaddafi does not hold warm sentiments towards the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Arab League. For this reason, he is asking for a permanent seat at the UN to be reserved for the African Union. I do not think this will suffice to re-create a just and fair UN. However, the continuation of the current state of reluctance and indifference will do nothing other than preserve the status quo. More radical and progressive recommendations should be voiced for a thorough reform at the UN.
Above all, what should be recalled with respect to the UN is that this organization, created in the special conditions of World War II, converted communities from a social and political phenomenon to nations via the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948. It should also be noted that this declaration indirectly implies that only nations are eligible to enjoy rights and freedoms. The United Nations was created in place of the League of Nations. This is the most merciless method and way to take the history of humanity into the Western-style course of development and to punish the communities unwilling to become nations by denying even the most basic rights to them. The transition from the League of Nations to the United Nations was not innocent or painless, and this is not a path that history had to follow. This was an imposition by the Western world that was enjoying prosperity and political as well as military advantages.
Secondly, the legal norms that the UN has declared to apply to the nations have been serving the interests of the big powers; for this reason, resolutions by the Security Council that do not fit the plans and interests of superpowers have no significance at all. For instance, the US ignores such resolutions against Israel. However, they rush to take action when the UN Security Council decides to impose an embargo against Iran. It is waste of time for Turkey, Iran or Egypt to compete over a permanent seat at the UN in an attempt to represent the Islamic world. The other Islamic countries acting individually may not change the current UN mechanism, either. To be influential and effective, states represented at the OIC should have a permanent seat as a unified bloc at the UN Security Council; they should ask for such a permanent membership. The leader of the OIC should be elected based on the demographic aspects of the represented countries; a system of rotation should be implemented for the sake of justice and fairness between the members. To do this, Turkey should cooperate with Iran and Egypt. The OIC has not played a significant role since its inception; it is not much more than a protocol organization now. Maybe such a move will make it a powerful actor for regional integration.
Napoleon said İstanbul would be the best candidate for a world capital if one were needed. It would not be too unlikely or illogical to move the UN headquarters from New York to İstanbul.
