Briefing: The Summit of the Future

With much anticipation, national delegates and members of accredited organizations will meet in New York City to recast the United Nations. Titled the Summit of the Future, this two-day event (September 22-23) will be a deliberation over how the world body should move forward. In the face of crisis – wars and rumors of wars, economic downturns, social unrest – how can the UN be refashioned into an effective system of global [authoritarian] governance? 

As the revised draft of The Pact for the Future – the Summit’s core document – states, “Our challenges are deeply interconnected and far exceed the capacity of any single State alone. They can only be addressed collectively…”

This is the heartbeat of the Summit – to muster collective action at the global level, over-and-above the capacity of any single nation. Thus, the United Nations must be reformed to meet these international challenges…so goes the narrative and propaganda. 

To that end, almost 60 action points are laid out in their working document – areas of agreement to be committed upon by national representatives. Here are a few examples from the draft:

– “Plan for the future and strengthen our collective efforts to turbocharge the full implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development by 2030 and beyond.”

– “Fulfil our commitment to comply with the decisions of the International Court of Justice in any case to which our State is a party.”

– “Address the challenges posed to international peace and security by adverse climate and environmental impacts.”

– “Support the Secretary-General to strengthen the United Nations’ role in science, technology and innovation.”

– “Strengthen the United Nations system.”

– “Accelerate the reform of the international financial architecture so that it can meet the challenge of climate change.”

– “Strengthen the governance of outer space to foster its peaceful, safe, and sustainable uses for the benefit of all humanity.”

These goals carry a level of vagueness, leaving the reader to wonder how such broad ideas will be implemented. However, the draft offers pages of recommendations, including taxation coordination between member countries and exploring “options for international cooperation on the taxation of high net-worth individuals.” Promoting universal health coverage to support poverty eradication and “build trust” is another recommendation. In a different section of the document, interreligious dialogue is advised to “strengthen social cohesion and contribute to sustainable development.”

From “global economic governance” to supporting indigenous spiritual culture to tightening the relationship between the UN and regional authorities, the list of recommendations and proposals is long. The bottom line: the UN desires to be empowered, and in turn, to manage a range of complex issues at the global level. Supporters have dubbed it UN 2.0.

“A transformation in global governance is essential to ensure that the positive progress we have seen across all three pillars [sustainable development, peace and security, and global digitization] of the United Nations’ work in recent decades does not unravel,” the draft document explains. “We will not allow this to happen.”

But like all other UN summits, there’s more to the picture. An extensive preparation process precedes the main event, and it’s within this domain that a fuller vision emerges – dreams of what “could be,” and ideas that may be realized in the near future. Actors in this process involve special interest groups, non-governmental organizations, academic associations, and international institutions. Conferences take place – both within and outside the UN system – reports are compiled and published, and momentum is generated as these different players stretch the boundaries and push the agenda forward.  

Here are a few examples.

Vatican: On March 4-5, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences hosted a workshop on the Summit of the Future, with participation from the Muslim Council of Elders, regional and global banking representatives (Inter-American Development Bank, World Bank, African Development Bank), former and current UN officials, governmental ministers, and academic experts. As the workshop agenda book describes it, “At the very heart of Pope Francis’s messages in the past decade has been the urgent need for a strengthened multilateralism to address the growing ecological and social crises of our age.”

Reiterating the Pope’s desire from his encyclical Laudato Si’, the Pontifical Academy emphasized, “Interdependence obliges us to think of one world with a common plan” (emphasis in original).

Although published texts from this event do not appear to be publicly available, what is known is that the workshop recognized the changing multipolar reality – that the Western world is declining as other powers rise – and that the United Nations will need to be reinvigorated to meet planetary challenges.  

Jeffrey Sachs at the workshop. Sachs is a UN advisor and president of the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network. He is also a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.

Climate Governance Commission (CGC): The CGC is a working group attached to a larger body known as the Global Governance Forum (GGF). Bringing together world thought-leaders and policymakers, and linking with organizations like the Stimson Center and Citizens for Global Solutions (formerly the World Federalist Association), the CGC/GGF puts forward recommendations for the next level of global management. 

In 2023 the CGC issued a report titled Governing Our Planetary Emergency, paid in part by the Rockefeller Foundation, which examined the climate change agenda in the light of future governance. Moreover, the report specifically highlighted the Summit of the Future, along with other UN events, as a milestone “to move the planet through a swift and just global transition.” 

Here are a few suggestions from Governing Our Planetary Emergency

– Establish a Global Environment Agency “to serve as the central node for climate, and for general global environmental/Earth system governance.”

– Establish an International Court for the Environment, which would work alongside the Global Environment Agency. 

– Develop an international law for the Anthropocene, that is, a framework of law designed around the total Earth/Human relationship: that the “planet operates as a single, integrated system, and as such, should be legally recognised as an international common good.” National sovereignty would thus be subject to a framework that first acknowledges global interdependence. 

– Reform the global financial architecture “to ensure that the financial system pursues climate, Planetary Boundary, and development goals in parallel.” Such a restructuring would compel private companies to partner with governments and align their productivity and profits with planetary goals, as set by the international community. 

– Creation of United Nations Parliamentary Assembly that “could be strengthened over time to become a world parliamentary body, much as the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community evolved into the European Parliament.”

– Funding for the United Nations: If the UN is to become the primary mechanism to manage Earth, then it will need its own funding. With that in mind, the CGC recommends a global value-added tax or a fee on international monetary transactions, with the money collected being allocated to the UN. 

Foundation for European Progressive Studies: FEPS is a progressive-left think tank that works with other policy groups and high-level European Union actors. This year, in anticipation of the Summit of the Future, FEPS released its collaborative publication, A New Global Deal: Reforming World Governance. It recommended the following:

– Give the UN General Assembly new powers, allowing it to pass resolutions on conflicts without waiting for Security Council approval.

– Upgrading the UN Economic and Security Council to becoming an Executive Council, thus making it operational to deal with non-military challenges at the international level. 

– Create a Global Resilience Council that could bring together all necessary UN agencies and stakeholders, and then coordinate responses to crisis situations.

– Reform the Security Council so that veto power does not remain locked within a few countries. At this time, if the United States or China or the United Kingdom decide to veto a resolution, then the motion is effectively stopped. This has been a sore point for many in the international community, and so the report recommends changing the veto system, raising the voting threshold, and possibly adding new nations with veto powers.  

– Establish a UN Environment Agency “with supranational and binding authority.”

Other suggestions include giving the Secretary General greater autonomy and establishing an emergency platform to deal with global shocks, like Covid-19. It also recommended the creation of a UN Parliamentary Assembly and the empowerment of the International Court of Justice, which “should play a central role in the architecture of a reformed global governance system.”   

However, an interesting point was made about regional organizations and other international groups. Entities like the European Union, African Union and other regional bodies – along with outfits like the G7, G20 and BRICS – encompass a wider community, and these groups should be tied into the UN system. 

Other organizations have put forth ideas for the UN Summit to consider. Some of these goals will remain as ideas only, fading away in time. Others will percolate for a while, then be accepted. In fact, many of these ideas – like the creation of a UN Parliamentary Assembly – have been deliberated and discussed for years. At some point adoption is bound to take place; and that is the purpose of continual pushing, because it builds momentum toward an achievable goal. 

And what is the goal? Enforceable global management: to move past the present world order in which nations cooperate voluntarily, into a system where planetary authority is established and strictly enforced. 

But that’s not a surprise. It’s a vision that has been pushed for decades by Popes, political priests and global pundits. What’s different this time is that it might actually be implemented. ■

www.garykah.org