| dc.description.abstract | The 2005 World Summit was announced as a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity to reform the
United Nations so as to provide it with the institutional and policy tools needed to meet the
challenges and threats to peace and security in contemporary world. But the Summit was also
meant to be a crucial test for the EU common foreign policy and for the state of transatlantic
relations. As a matter of fact the success of any UN Reform could be hardly envisaged without
the capacity of EU Member States to advance common and consensus-gathering positions and
without bridging the gap between US and EU strategic visions on multilateralism and global
governance. In order to discuss whether in New York an historic occasion has been seized or
rather lost, a group of distinguished scholars and high level diplomats was convened in Florence
at the joint invitation of IAI, EUI and UNICRI in the aftermath of the World Summit. This
Working Paper reports the debate held at the international conference and offers a first
assessment of the main outcomes of the Summit while drawing the future perspectives of the
UN reform process. It is submitted that the Summit has fallen short of the historical UN reform
the Secretary General had hoped for, but nonetheless it records some positive advancements.
This is especially the case of those issues where a transatlantic agreement was reached, such as
the decision to establish a Peace Building Commission for post-conflict reconstruction, the
establishment of a Human Right Council and of a Democracy Fund to strengthen the countries’
capacity to implement the principles of democracy and the express endorsement of the new
guiding concept of “responsibility to protect” the victims of severe violations of human rights.
In other fields, achievements have to be measured against the ambiguity of the final text and room is left
to further negotiations. For instance, the key concept of “human security”, which have been launched in
the Report of the High Level Panel’s on Threats, Challenges and Changes (“A More Secure World: Our
Shared Responsibility”), is endorsed but watered down to some very generic statement and a clear
commitment to discuss further the notion in the General Assembly. Similarly, the historic decision to set
up a new Human Right Council fails in addressing all the relevant features of the new organ
(compositions, status, powers and relationship with existing organs and procedures) which are left to
further negotiations in the General Assembly. A final evaluation remains therefore controversial. Lack of
progress has to be recorded in core policy areas. In the field of development and environment the
outcome document simply restates principles and commitments already affirmed. In the field of peace and
security, no significant progresses were made in providing a global framework to combat terrorism nor
specific commitments on disarmament and non-proliferation were assumed. In the highly-politicised issue
of Security Council Reform, the division among EU member states did not help to reach a compromise
solution. However, as a test for the EU capacity to act jointly and effectively on the international level,
the World Summit has yielded positive results. The EU member States succeeded in putting their political
weight behind a proactive attitude throughout the process, in pursuit of a number of clear objectives. On
many issues, Europe may take the lead of the reform process, building on its own experience in
promoting a lasting peace, protecting human rights and fostering development. Its commitment to an
effective multilateralism attempts to promote a successful global governance without yielding to the
temptation of unilateral drifts. No matter how determined and powerful, a single State or group of
virtuous States cannot face the threats and challenges of a global world alone. In its endless opposition to
unilateralism, multilateralism is mandated by the need for an effective global governance. For many,
respect – and maybe with the exception of the field of global economic governance – the UN remains a
viable and irreplaceable institution. In this regard, the foremost achievement of the World Summit is
precisely the fact that all the members of the UN have restated the central role of the Organization in
providing global governance and have committed themselves to strengthening its effectiveness. | en |
