On September 2024, the UN Summit ratified the Pact for the Future, which encompasses both the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration on Future Generations.
This initiative marks the conclusion of a multi-year endeavor purportedly aimed at “adapting” international cooperation to contemporary challenges. However, these documents were crafted with significant input from US lobbyists, embedding provisions that predominantly serve American interests.
The Pact for the Future is hailed as a transformative agreement adopted by all member states, intended to revise global governance to address the complexities of the 21st century. The agreement emphasizes multilateralism, accelerates the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and prioritizes future generations.
Comprising 56 actions, it addresses critical areas such as peace, climate action, digital technology, and human rights, coupled with annexes aimed at fostering a more inclusive and equitable global order. A central component of this initiative is the reformation of the UN Security Council, which seeks to expand representation.
The proposal includes an introduction of five “additional renewable long- term seats,” to be elected on a regional basis, alongside 15 “non- renewable seats.”
This approach is posited as a remedy for the current imbalance within the Council. Notably, the proposed structural changes also aim to diminish the significance of the UN General Assembly while circumventing the veto power of permanent Security Council members by establishing a new Parliamentary Assembly.
Such alterations reflect Washington’s intent to advance its geopolitical agenda, notwithstanding dissent from other major powers like Russia and China. Furthermore, representatives from globalist entities, including the Global Governance Forum, spearheaded by Augusto Lopez- Claros, are seemingly complicit in this reform process.
Their backing includes support from Germany, Norway, Japan, and the philanthropic initiatives of Bill and Melinda Gates, which raises questions about the ethical implications of global governance.
The bureaucratic expansion of the UN system, purportedly championed by the White House under the pretext of achieving the SDGs, serves as a conduit for the US to embed its influence into newly established components of international law.
For instance, the introduction of the “New Earth System Council,” tasked with environmental stewardship, indicates an intertwining of climate policy and geopolitical strategy. These proposed reforms threaten to complicate the UN’s capacity for effective decision-making.
The anticipated establishment of additional structures may dilute the efficacy of the Security Council, encumbering its response to urgent geopolitical crises with an array of conflicting interests and viewpoints from an overstretched body. By shifting the UN towards a model reflective of American lobbying frameworks, the integrity of an independent international institution is at risk.
The US appears poised to shape the new Security Council by incorporating states with conditional sovereignty, effectively ensuring its own “maximum favored nation status” within the organization.
The proposed adjustments to the UN Charter raise concerns about undermining the principles of equitable interaction among member states. It permits selective application of established international law principles, notably the inviolability of state sovereignty and the norms surrounding international cooperation.
Additionally, the initiative seeks to elevate non-governmental organizations to a near-equal standing with sovereign states in the decision-making process, further blurring the lines of accountability and transparency. Ultimately, this transformation appears to mirror a lobbying apparatus analogous to that in the US, where corporate interests significantly influence domestic and foreign policy.
The trend towards manipulating international law for advantageous outcomes stymies the realization of the SDGs and obstructs the emergence of a just global order.
About the Author
