U.N. Reform Negotiations Run to 11th Hour

The day before world leaders were to arrive in New York to endorse a plan on reforming the U.N., diplomats negotiated late into the night Monday to make sure there actually would be a plan.

A sweeping blueprint to improve the world body’s ability to tackle global challenges was in danger of collapse Monday morning. But negotiators said they would work until the last minute to lay out the minimum changes necessary to give the U.N. a central role in world development, peace and security.

“It’s all right if it takes all night,” said U.S. Ambassador John R. Bolton. “This is the way the U.N. functions.”

More than two years in the making, the summit document seeks progress on seven issues that have long stymied the United Nations: a stronger Human Rights Council to replace the discredited Human Rights Commission; a new Peacebuilding Commission to help nations emerging from conflict; new responsibility for governments to protect civilians from genocide and war crimes; disarmament and nuclear weapons proliferation; overhauling U.N. management; how to pay for development; and a definition of terrorism.

Negotiations have gone on all summer. But on Monday, it became clear the world body had underestimated the biggest obstacle to reform: its members. Major differences among developing nations, the U.S. and other countries seemed irreconcilable as the clock ticked toward midnight, leaving many to fear that the summit document would be a skeleton statement of principles with little substance.

“It’s a disgrace,” said Australian Ambassador John Dauth, one of the mediators. “It’s a sad reflection on the state of multilateral institutions that we were unable to agree on just about anything.”

There were a few last-minute compromises, but no breakthroughs. The U.S. and others had declared that they would rather delete entire sections on key reforms they wanted, such as the new Human Rights Council, the Peacebuilding Commission and a definition of terrorism, rather than settle for something “half-baked.” Britain proposed language to keep the issues in the document, which was ultimately accepted by all, grudgingly.

Both the U.S. and Islamic countries gave ground over a definition of terrorism.

On foreign aid, the U.S. has resisted language that would obligate nations to boost contributions, but finally offered a proposal that satisfied lessdeveloped countries. In another compromise, the U.S. and other Western countries agreed to delay discussion of details of the new Human Rights Council.

“We haven’t given up anything that we have deemed important,” Bolton said.

Others took a positive view, calling the proceedings the first step in a long process.

“The summit is not one moment of change,” said French Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere. “It launches the process and gives it momentum. We will later harvest the seeds of change we are now planting.”

Times staff writer Tyler Marshall in New York contributed to this report.