The UN: Getting into Bed with Big Business
By George Monbiot, author of Poisoned Arrows, Amazon Watershed and No Man's
Land; and lecturer in philosophy and environmental science at the Universities
of Keele and East London.
The UN's metamorphosis began at the Earth Summit in 1992. The UN Centre on
Transnational Corporations (UNCTC), which tried to help weak nations to protect
themselves from predatory companies, had recommended that businesses should be
internationally regulated. The UN refused to circulate its suggestions.
Instead, the summit adopted the proposals of a very different organisation: the
Business Council for Sustainable Development, composed of the chief executives
of big corporations. Unsurprisingly, the council recommended that
companies should regulate themselves. In 1993, the UNCTC was dissolved.
In June 1997, the president of the general assembly announced that corporations
would be given a formal role in UN decision-making. Kofi Annan, the UN
secretary general, suggested that he would like to see more opportunities for
companies - rather than governments or the UN - to set global standards.
At the beginning of 1998, the UN Conference on Trade and Development revealed
that it was working with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) to help
developing countries "formulate competition and consumer protection
law" and to facilitate trade. The UN, which until a few years before
had sought to defend poor countries from big business, would now be helping big
business to overcome the resistance of poor countries. The ICC repaid the
favour by asking the world's richest nations to give the UN more money. In
January 1999, Annan launched a new agency, called the Business Humanitarian
Forum. It was jointly chaired by the UN High Commissioner on Refugees and
the president of Unocal - the only major U.S. company still operating in Burma.
It was helping the Burmese government to build a massive gas pipeline, during
the construction of which Burmese soldiers tortured and killed local people.
"The business community," Annan explained to Unocal, Nestle, Rio Tinto
and the other members of the new forum, "is fast becoming one of the UN's
most important allies.... That is why the organisation's doors are open to
you as never before."
Two months later, a leaked memo revealed that the UN Development Program (UNDP)
had accepted $50,000 from each of 11 giant corporations. In return, Nike,
Rio Tinto, Shell, BP, Novartis, ABB, Dow Chemical and the other companies gained
privileged access to UNDP offices, acquiring, in the agency's words, "a new
and unique vehicle for market development activities," as well as
"worldwide recognition for their cooperation with the UN." The
UNDP developed a special UN logo that the companies could put on their products.
After fierce campaigning by human rights groups, this scheme was suspended.
But in July 2000, Annan launched a far more ambitious partnership, a
"global compact" with 50 of the world's biggest and most controversial
corporations. The companies promised to respect their workers and the
environment. This, Annan told them, would "safeguard open markets
while at the same time creating a human face for the global economy."
The firms that signed his compact would be better placed to deal with
"pressure from single-issue groups." Again, they would be
allowed to use the UN's logo. But there would be no binding commitments
and no external assessment of how well they were doing.
The UN, in other words, appears to be turning itself into an enforcement agency
for the global economy, helping western companies to penetrate new markets while
avoiding the regulations which would be the only effective means of holding them
to account. By making peace with power, the UN is declaring war upon the
powerless.
Source: Manchester Guardian, August 31, 2000.