Friends,

We hope you are well.

Today in The Geneva Observer, a follow-up on our recent story about the upcoming International Labour Conference (ILC), which opens on Monday (June 5) in Geneva. The expected nomination of Qatar’s Labour Minister Ali bin Saeed bin Samikh Al Marri continues to be opposed by labour organizations and human rights defenders, and the European Trade Union Confederation is now calling for a vote to block the nomination. If it appears unlikely that such a resolution will eventually be submitted to the ILC, UN diplomats here are nevertheless busy trying to find a way to avoid a contentious debate—and also doing some finger-pointing.

The 76th World Health Assembly concluded its work last week. Jamil Chade tells us that WHO’s governing body seized the opportunity to revisit long-standing pre-pandemic issues.

In a dispatch from NYC, Stéphanie Fillon has a preview of a showdown between Belarus and Slovenia as they both vie, bitterly, for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

Our guest essay of the week is about what its author Chris Patten calls the “myth” of Western decline: “In recent years, China has capitalized on the G7’s diminishing share of global GDP to proclaim the superiority of its one-party system over what it perceives as ‘decadent’ liberal democracies. But China’s own actions show that the West still commands significant influence in shaping world affairs,” he argues.

Pressure mounts around Qatar's expected presidency of International Labour Conference

The International Labour Conference (ILC), often referred to as the international parliament of labour, will open its 111th session on Monday. Three days before it commences, the question of the expected election of Qatar—the country at the center of “Qatargate,” one of the biggest corruption scandals in Europe—to the ILC presidency remains highly divisive. Pressure has been mounting from unions and workers’ rights activists to prevent Doha from assuming the position.

As it stands, Qatar’s Minister of Labour, Ali bin Saeed bin Samikh Al Marri, should be elected on Monday morning. Meanwhile, diplomatic efforts are underway in Geneva to contain potential reputational damage from his election to the ILO: “It is an object of serious preoccupation,” a European diplomat told The G|O. For many inside and outside the organization, such a predictably explosive issue and unwelcome distraction could and should have been defused much earlier.

Last Sunday (May 28), the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), representing 93 national trade unions in 41 countries, circulated a draft emergency resolution on Qatar among EU countries. This follows two strongly-worded letters expressing concerns about the potential damage to the ILO’s reputation sent to the ILO D-G Gilbert Houngbo by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and Building and Woodworkers International (BWI), together representing about 200 million workers worldwide. “Electing as Chair of the ILC a representative of a government that, at this moment in time, rejects what the ILO has stood for during more than a century is an insult to the organization,” the BWI leadership wrote.

The ETUC’s draft resolution goes a step further, demanding that the European governments use their votes at the ILC to hold Qatar accountable for its broken promises by opposing the nomination of its Labour Minister as Conference president. “The Qatari government’s promises to the ILO that it would seriously reform its legislation […] have not been implemented,” states the draft resolution. And in reference to Qatargate, the ETUC stresses that “evidence has appeared that the Qatari governments tried to inappropriately influence the decision-making of European Institutions,” with “ongoing investigations into allegations that [Qatar] sought to bribe political figures.” In this context, for the ETUC, electing Qatar to the presidency would be “outrageous.”

On Tuesday, faced with the ETUC’s demands, EU government representatives met to coordinate their position. Diplomatic sources familiar with the discussions told The G|O that should a vote be called for by the Workers’ group, the EU countries would abstain.

To date, the established practice of rotating the ILC presidency among regional groups of governments who are free to nominate their candidate has never been contested. Qatar was elected Vice-President last year, which was before Qatargate exploded and before new allegations surfaced of continued labour and human rights violations in the country, despite Doha’s assurances that it was making necessary changes to its laws and practice: According to labour and human rights organizations, freedom of association is still not guaranteed, non-Qatari citizens are still forbidden to form or join trade unions, and domestic workers are still not protected by labour law. Despite repealing some of the central elements of the notorious kafala system, serious implementation problems remain. Critics of the country also point out that out of 187 ILO Member States, Qatar is one of nine countries with the lowest record of ratification of ILO conventions.

While it is not certain at this point if a resolution will be submitted by the Workers’ group (which has not responded to our request for comment), the situation is clearly unprecedented.

While the ILO’s governance is unique among UN agencies, it is also the most inclusive, thanks to its tripartism that gives voting rights to governments, and employers’ and workers’ organizations. The uproar around the Qatari presidency, therefore, matters greatly. It could upset the work of the Conference and polarize already difficult debates on important topics. As one diplomatic source explains, “disputing the nomination process may make debates more difficult in a tripartite organization that largely operates by consensus. The risk is also that it will distract the organization when important issues like pushing for social justice or allocating resources to fighting discrimination against LGBTQI+ need to be addressed.”

All this leaves the organization in a delicate position, informed ILO watchers tell us, with the result a no-win situation and leaving damage control as the only option.

But for labour and human rights organizations, allowing Qatar to accede to the ILC presidency will send Doha the wrong signal, letting the country off the hook for failing to deliver promised reform and giving it latitude to continue its campaign of influence.

Recall that in 2017, Qatar was able to fend off the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry by signing an agreement for technical program with the ILO, financing it with a $25 million donation. Qatargate then revealed a vast alleged corruption scheme to bribe members of the European Parliament and the leadership of ITUC—which, for some, explains why the ITUC toned down its criticism of Qatar after previously being one of its harshest critics.

Today, reports continue to reveal labour and human rights violations. However, as one former senior ILO member bitterly remarked to The G|O: “with the World Cup gone and the world sucking up Qatari gas, the pressure to reform might well be off.”

“Qatar behaves like it owns the place,” another former senior employee says. “Not a member of the Governing Body [the executive body of the ILO] they feel free to pressure other countries, for instance to vote against allocating resources to fight discrimination against gender-based minorities.”

Some UN diplomats in Geneva are critical of ILO Director-General Gilbert Houngbo for having let the issue fester for so long. “He knew by February that the Asia-Pacific group would be presenting Qatar for the presidency,” one diplomat points out. “But he didn’t sound the alert with Member States, seemingly oblivious to the risks posed to the reputation and the moral standing of the organization. The nominating process is not set in stone, it’s just a practice, a solution could have been found,” the source told The G|O. Houngbo continues to take the narrow view that the nominating process is fully in the hands of the Member States. “The International Labour Office, i.e. the Organization’s Secretariat, is not involved in any manner in the process for the election of the President,” the ILO told us in a written statement.

Some of our sources see this latest episode as a broader problem with Houngbo’s leadership, pointing out that past D-Gs would likely have found a way to take a stand in defending the organization while not disputing the Members States’ prerogatives in nominating the ILC president.

“Gilbert Houngbo has chosen to bring in a new team with little or no experience of the ILO and it how operates,” a UN diplomat told us. “People with institutional knowledge of the organization have been put aside or mostly relegated to minor roles. The leadership is divided. The atmosphere is heavy.”

-PHM

Post-Pandemic, the World Health Organization Begins to Refocus

With the COVID-19 emergency increasingly behind us, the 76th World Health Assembly (WHA76), WHO’s executive body, focused its efforts on better identifying WHO’s priorities of action. That included bringing back to the fore long-standing issues and deficiencies left unattended because of the pandemic.

One of the highlights of the meeting was the adoption of the first global strategy on infection prevention and control, after almost two decades of discussions. The strategy provides governments with guidelines to substantially reduce the ongoing risk of health care¬–associated infections, including those that exhibit antimicrobial resistance. Setting an ambitious target, it calls for every person accessing and providing health care to be safe from associated infections by 2030.

Another resolution hailed as “historic” focuses on strengthening rehabilitation in health systems. It aims to increase awareness of rehabilitation when setting health priorities and research agendas, allocating resources, promoting cooperation and enabling technology transfer. The resolution contains a detailed list of actions to be taken by the WHO Secretariat, including publishing a baseline report by the end of 2026 with information on the capacity of Member States to respond to rehabilitation needs, and developing targets and indicators for effective coverage of rehabilitation services by 2030.

COVID-19, however, has obviously left a long-lasting legacy on the agenda of the health diplomacy. Beyond the negotiations around a pandemic treaty, governments discussed and approved a resolution on strengthening countries’ diagnostics capacity and improving access to diagnostic services. It recognizes diagnostics as key, and covers actions for research and development, manufacturing, and addressing access barriers in general.

Yet another consequence of the pandemic was the approval of a resolution on increasing access to medical oxygen. In developing countries, many health facilities lack uninterrupted access to medical oxygen, resulting in preventable deaths—a problem that has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Oxygen has been included on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) since 1979, but the latest decision recognizes that its generation and distribution requires a specialized infrastructure. It requests that governments set up national systems in order to secure the uninterrupted provision of medical oxygen to health care facilities at all levels. WHO will have a supporting role; developing guidelines, technical specifications, forecasting tools and training materials.

Catching-up on services undermined by COVID-19 was also a key theme at this year’s conference. Immunization has become a priority for WHO, following significant setbacks resulting from the pandemic. With 67 million children missing at least one essential vaccine during the last three years, finding and immunizing these children is a matter of urgency. This task will require effort from organizations and individuals at all levels—global, national and local—to catch-up on and strengthen immunization programs. “We have an emergency in front of us,” said Bruce Aylward, WHO Assistant Director-General.

Politically, governments have also had an eye on the United Nations High-Level Meeting (HLM) on Universal Health Coverage (UHC). During WHA76, authorities expressed alarm that millions of people cannot access life-saving and health-enhancing interventions. Out-of-pocket spending on health affects over 1 billion people, pushing hundreds of millions of people into extreme poverty—another situation that has worsened due to the pandemic.

In response, governments agreed a resolution supporting preparations for the HLM on UHC in September 2023. The aim is to secure a political commitment that all people will have access to the full range of quality health services they need without financial hardship. In a transformative policy shift, governments also agreed to reorient their health systems based on primary health care as a pillar for universal care.

On the same lines, a resolution called for global efforts to strengthen emergency services. Concerned that the COVID-19 pandemic revealed pervasive gaps in the capacity to deliver these services, the document calls on governments to create national policies for sustainable funding for emergency care.

-JC

New York Braces Itself for Tense UN Security Council Elections

“Candidate since 2007, uncontested until December 2021.” That’s Belarus’s slogan for its run at a non-permanent United Nations Security Council seat for the years 2024-25. “Uncontested” refers to Slovenia’s late entry in the race. Minsk sees Washington’s hand in the small EU member’s decision to contest the seat, and loudly bemoans what it sees as a political decision.

Switzerland’s slogan, as you may recall, was “A plus for peace,” deftly shortened for virality to “A+4” with a dove emoji at the end. No recriminations there, and none needed, as its application was, indeed, uncontested.

The campaign will reach its apogee next Tuesday, June 6. UN member states will decide whether Belarus, one of Russia’s closest allies on the world stage, deserves a seat on the Security Council, or if it wishes to send a message to the Kremlin by choosing Slovenia instead.

The two countries are running for the Eastern European seat on the Council, currently occupied by Albania. The seat is often undisputed but the opposition, diplomats in New York told The G|O, is part of a broader campaign by the West at the UN to diminish Russia’s influence from within the organization, ever since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has been in a stalemate since June 2022 as neither Russia nor North Macedonia have been able to get a majority of votes. There have also been efforts to contest Russian candidates in other directors’ positions within the UN system—and also, of course, the highly publicized vote to suspend Russia from the UN’s Human Rights Council.

Louis Charbonneau, UN expert at Human Rights Watch (HRW), applauds Slovenia’s decision to run, and believes countries should have to face opposition and defend their human rights record to deserve a seat on the Council. “We already have Russia and China, and none of the P5 can be voted off,” Charbonneau said. “Good on Slovenia for joining the race and giving it some competition so that member states have a choice.”

Since the beginning of the invasion, Belarus has been a strong supporter of Russia’s efforts, letting Russia use Belarussian territories as part of its war effort. Belarus is also allowing Russia to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in the country. At the UN, Belarus has consistently refused to denounce Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Some go as far as calling Belarus a puppet regime of Russia.

In April, and for the first time since the launch of its invasion, Russia held the Security Council presidency—a presidency that some say tarnished the image of the world body. Giving Belarus a non-permanent seat on the Council would have a similar effect, many believe.

“The Security Council is already one of the most dysfunctional parts of the UN, and it’s dysfunctional because of the veto, it was built in that way,” Charbonneau said, “so if you want to take a dysfunctional body and make it even more dysfunctional, potentially, then having Belarus on the Security Council is probably the right idea.” Human Rights Watch doesn’t usually weigh in on the Security Council campaign but felt compelled to do so because of Belarus’ dire human rights record.

Belarus, for its part, has denounced the move as a political one—as has Russia. Following the announcement of its candidacy in December 2021, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced Washington’s support for the Slovenian bid. Since then, Belarus has been accusing the US of meddling in the campaign and Slovenia of running because of outside pressure. Slovenia’s campaign undoubtedly gained momentum after Russia invaded Ukraine a few months after.

“It is a clear manifestation of double standards,” Belarus ambassador to the UN Valentyn Rybakov said during a debate with Slovenia on May 15th, “this is an extremely politicized decision, which is basically aimed at punishing Belarus for its independent foreign policy.” Slovenia, for its part, rejected the claim it was pressured to jump in, and said its decision was driven by its belief that “the most appropriate countries [should] get a seat on the Council.” Slovenia’s campaign slogan is “Building trust, securing future.” Some UN watchers quip that it might instead have been “Better late than never.”

Next week’s election isn’t a done deal by any measure. A diplomat familiar with the behind-the-scenes diplomatic efforts told The G|O they were expecting many rounds of voting, as countries need a two-thirds majority to win. Many countries at the UN, especially in the global South, said they feel trapped between the West and Russia and have been trying to find new ways of approaching diplomacy on the difficult Ukraine file. Furthermore, “the vote is by secret ballot,” HRW’s Charbonneau remarks. “So whatever diplomats tell each other publicly, when they’re alone with this sheet of paper that they can fold up and put into the box, there’s no real accountability for it.”

If the recent contentious ECOSOC vote is any indication, it may take quite a few rounds of voting to finally allocate the coveted seat on the divided Council.

-SF

The Myth of Western Decline

By Chris Patten*

The recent G7 summit in Hiroshima culminated in an impressive show of unity over the war in Ukraine and China’s expansionism. But are analysts and commentators right to cite the group’s declining share of global GDP as evidence of its dwindling power and influence?

China, in particular, has capitalized on this trend in recent years to proclaim the superiority of its one-party system over the “decadence” of wealthy liberal democracies. Meanwhile, the G20 – which, along with the G7 countries, includes China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia, and eight other countries – has carved out a prominent role on the global stage.

But the evidence for the G7’s decline is hardly overwhelming. While the G20 countries comprise roughly two-thirds of the world’s population and account for 85% of global GDP, the G7 countries alone account for 44% of the world economy despite containing only about 10% of its population.

To be sure, the G20’s economic performance has improved dramatically over the past few years, as billions of individuals in developing countries have increasingly participated in a global economy whose rulebook was primarily authored by the West. As Western democracies became more open to trade following the end of the Cold War, developing countries gained access to huge markets for their often lower-priced goods. For example, Chinese exports to the United States increased from $3.86 billion in 1985 to $537 billion in 2022.

Even so, given that the prosperity of affluent democracies has been a driving force behind developing countries’ success, it would be misguided to interpret this trend as a sign of the West’s decline. Similarly, while it has become increasingly common to predict the end of America’s economic dominance, history suggests that the US will overcome its current problems, as it has consistently done in the past...(more)

Today's Briefing: Philippe Mottaz - Jamil Chade - Stephanie Fillion

Guest Essay: Chris Patten

Edited by: Dan Wheeler