Boutros-Ghali Has Outstayed His Welcome : United Nations: The Clinton administration should weigh in on the new secretary general.

It’s time to get rid of Boutros Boutros-Ghali. The secretary general of the United Nations has outlasted his usefulness, and he is breaking his “one term and I’m out” promise by running for reelection.

The U.N. is in crisis, and this is what it needs: a secretary general who can inspire confidence in the organization, who can sell a U.N. agenda around the world--on PBS, CNN and BBC--without being vulnerable because of perceived failures and misjudgments in Somalia, Rwanda and Bosnia; who will not allow U.N. troops to watch while hundreds of thousands of people are hacked to death or marched to killing fields in future Rwandas and Bosnias; who will take seriously the calls to get rid of a ludicrous oversupply of outmoded fiefdoms inside the organization.

That’s not BBG, as he is called.

Boutros-Ghali’s five-year term is over at the end of this year. Many candidates are interested in succeeding him, and because of the arcane and secretive way support gathers for a candidate for secretary general, one of them might get the votes but lack the capability to do the job. Boutros-Ghali, meanwhile, has gathered his forces and thus far kept opponents from uniting behind one opponent.

This year, for the first time in the 50-year U.N. history, there are several strong women candidates for secretary general, among them Irish President Mary Robinson and Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland. What distinguishes both of these women is that they are elected officials. There might be something very positive about having a U.N. leader who had gone through a public election process and would understand how to make the case convincingly when the world was being asked to put its money or its soldiers on the line. Another candidate is Sadako Ogata of Japan, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees, who has shown what a competent, determined U.N. bureaucrat can do. There are those who believe that if she were chosen, Japan might open up its purse a little more to help with U.N. bills.

Not all the “hot” candidates are women. One who is being talked about in New York media and political circles is Koffe Anan, the Ghanian who heads U.N. peacekeeping operations. But when Anan’s name is mentioned, it is usually in the context that it is sub-Saharan Africa’s turn for secretary general. If Anan is selected, that should not be the reason. Being wed too strongly to the Cold War practice of regions rotating the top post is not a recipe for future success.

This is not a complete list, but it illustrates the problem: too many candidates, no clear opposition leader. The world’s superpower, the United States, is standing on the sidelines, not much wanting Boutros-Ghali but with no clear strategy to send him home. Distracted by a presidential election, the Clinton administration hasn’t settled on a candidate or even a process for picking one. Since Europe has proved it cannot get its diplomatic leadership act together, U.S. inertia at the U.N. means nothing happens.

So, what’s a world in need of better U.N. leadership to do? Get rid of this outmoded process, almost akin to reading tea leaves, for selecting a new secretary general. Pick the best person for the job, one who will begin by eliminating a batch of outdated alphabet soup agencies, who will get rid of cronyism and capture our imaginations, who will make Americans agreeable to paying $4.40 a year each toward the work of the United Nations.

The risk now is that lethargy will win the day. Boutros-Ghali might get his term extended by two years and be an ineffective lame duck. People who respect what the U.N. could do should not be satisfied with the Clinton administration’s laissez faire attitude. President Clinton needs to understand that leadership of the world’s superpower requires ensuring that the best person is picked to lead the U.N. That’s not BBG. Send him packing.