'Don't Think US Will Cut Off Ties With UN'

'Decline of the UN did not start with the Trump administration. It has been happening over the last two decades or more.'

"There is no doubt that emasculating of the UN is not good for the more than 100 small member States, whose collective geopolitical strength derives only from their membership of the UN," says Ambassador T S Tirumurti, India's Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York [2020-2022].

Ambassador Tirumurti was President of the UN Security Council for August 2021 and also chair of three committees of the council. India was elected non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council for the eighth time under his stewardship in 2021-2022.

"At the best of times, even G20 cannot speak for the world. That's why India has been in the forefront of UN Security Council reform to ensure that the UN starts reflecting contemporary realities in expansion of permanent and non-permanent membership and ensure greater say for developing countries including from Africa. Otherwise it will be difficult to stop its downward slide," Ambassador Tirumurti tells Rediff.com's Archana Masih in the second part of his interview.

• Part 1 of the Interview: 'Trump Will Do A Deal With China'

President Trump has withdrawn the US from UNHRC, WHO, UNESCO. Elon Musk backs the complete exit from the UN.
As a former ambassador to the UN what international fallout is this likely to have> Is it even possible for the US to cut off all ties with the UN, an organisation that it helped found?

I don't think that the US wants to cut off ties with the United Nations even if it is withdrawing or stopping funding to some of the UN agencies. But stoppage of funds and non-payment of dues by the US will certainly hit the UN and its agencies.

That said, it is not just an American matter. You will recall that even European countries stopped funding UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) at a whim during the Gaza war without regard for the millions of Palestinian refugees who are depending entirely on UNRWA for their existence.

There was hardly any outrage when that happened even though millions of Palestinian civilians, both women and innocent children, were affected.

However, the decline of the UN did not start with President Trump's administration. It has been happening especially over the last two decades or more.

Effectively what is happening is that the big powers, especially the P-5, are using the UN and other multilateral bodies to endorse their domestic positions or purely bilateral agreements. They have no use for multilateralism beyond this.

For example, on the Gaza war, the US under President Biden vetoed UN Security Council draft resolutions as the sole dissenter even when the two European P-5 countries, the UK and France, voted for the drafts.

Now President Trump is voting with the Russians on Ukraine against the UK and France, since the US is looking for a deal with Russia. Russia had also vetoed draft resolutions on Ukraine in the Council.

Maybe the US and Russia will come to the UN Security Council to endorse their bilateral deal on Ukraine war. So effectively the role of the Council has been eroded.

On another note, for example the European powers who are members of the International Criminal Court (ICC) recognise arrest warrants issued by the ICC on the Ukraine war, but not those issued by ICC on the Gaza war.

So now the notion of a so-called rules based international order is subservient to domestic or bilateral priorities.

There is no doubt that emasculating of the UN is not good for the more than 100 small member States, whose collective geopolitical strength derives only from their membership of the UN.

At the best of times, even G20 cannot speak for the world. That's why India has been in the forefront of UN Security Council reform to ensure that the UN starts reflecting contemporary realities in expansion of permanent and non-permanent membership and ensure greater say for developing countries including from Africa. Otherwise, it will be difficult to stop its downward slide.

Is the US going to become inward looking and stay away from promoting democracy and establishing peace and security in foreign lands from now on, a role it had solely spearheaded post the fall of the Berlin Wall?

Frankly, I am not sure how much of a role the US or its Western allies have played in promoting democracy or in establishing peace and security, since the Cold War ended, when you look at what they have done or not done.

For example, they effected regime change by force whether in Iraq in 2003 or Libya in 2011, where instability and/or collapse of governance continues after more than a decade.

NATO even waged a war against Serbia in Europe and carved out Kosovo and dismembered a sovereign State.

IMAGE: Ambassador T S Tirumurti

In 2021, the US withdrew hastily from Afghanistan leaving it in the hands of a radical Islamist Taliban. While they were in Afghanistan for nearly two decades, they could neither stabilise democracy nor Afghanistan.

More recently, in 2024, they supported a former al-Qaeda leader to overthrow President Assad of Syria, leaving Syria open for foreign powers to make further inroads into Syrian territory and sovereignty.

The logic of a deal with Russia to stabilise Europe has not yet been extended for a deal with Iran to stabilise the Middle East.

Consequently, whether the US has been outward looking or inward looking, I do not think promoting democracy abroad or establishing peace and security has been uppermost in their minds when they intervene in countries.

Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff.com