Chronicle: a pact for the future, but what future?

Last September, many heads of state and government, gathered on the occasion of the Summit for the Future at the UN General Assembly in New York, solemnly committed to working “for the advent of ‘a safe, peaceful, just, equitable, inclusive, sustainable and prosperous world, a world in which well-being, security and dignity and a healthy planet are a guarantee for all human beings.’

If we can subscribe without reservation to the aforementioned objective, the 56 measures recommended in the Pact for the Future, adopted at the end of the said summit, are at best wishful thinking. Indeed, this pact mentions the major issues facing humanity such as the eradication of poverty and famine, financing for development, peace and security, climate change, gender equality, living conditions of young people and people with disabilities.

However, the implementation of the 56 measures is subject to the hypothetical achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. However, even the UN Secretary General recognizes that these are doomed to failure. Indeed, the SDGs do not call into question the current economic policies at the origin of poor development and inequalities which continue to increase in the world. Furthermore, their implementation is mainly entrusted to transnational corporations (TNCs) which, far from being charitable works, are solely motivated by short-term profits, in favor of their majority shareholders.

If political leaders seem to have had a moment of lucidity when they stated in the introduction to the said pact: “If we do not change course, we risk falling into a future made of permanent crises and serial collapses”, the remedy ( namely the SDGs) that they advocate is already outdated. On the other hand, the pact does not mention the strengthening of public services, which is nevertheless essential to combat inequalities and contribute to the realization of economic, social and cultural rights.

This blatant contradiction is also reflected in the question of UN reform which occupies a significant part of the pact in question. Ideally, this old institution would require a good dusting, especially its Security Council: a body with five permanent members with veto power, namely three Western countries (United States, France and United Kingdom), as well as China and the Russia – the rest of the planet being absent.

But how can we consider it in the light of current polarization and that of the dizzying increase in military spending which augurs new wars and the lack of regard of certain States for international law?

For example, the United States, the world’s leading power and main founding member of the UN, does not respect the charter of this institution nor the decisions of the International Court of Justice. This country also imposes unilateral sanctions on countries which refuse to submit to its will, while continuing to arm and protect an allied country which massacres civilian populations, health personnel, UN officials, attacks to the Blue Helmets and, moreover, declares the UN Secretary General persona non grata.

Instead of relaunching international cooperation and restoring trust between people and their political leaders (who seem to be disconnected from reality), the Summit for the Future ended in a failure which will undoubtedly have consequences in the future (but what future?) and will further widen the gap between citizens and their political leaders.

Did you find an error? Please report it to us.

1 comment