No statesman has ever taken the rostrum of the United Nations to threaten a member of the world body of total destruction. President Donald Trump has broken this long-held tradition. Addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations on September 19, the US President unfolded his belligerent policy. He warned North Korea of total destruction and called its leader a "rocket man." He characterised the Iran nuclear deal an "embarrassment" and signalled that his administration would pull out of the agreement. Trump's defiant speech put 150 delegations on notice that the United States will pursue a nationalist policy aimed at safeguarding its own interests only. He reminded the diplomats: "Major portions of the world are in conflict, and some are in fact going to hell".
The United Nations was created following the end of the World War II to preserve peace and tranquillity in the world, settle disputes through dialogue and negotiation and prevent the world from risking another World War. The founders of the United Nations witnessed the carnage, destruction and sufferings wrought by the wars and made determined efforts to create an organisation that would serve as deterrent to armed conflicts. Notwithstanding putting high hopes on the world body, they did not rule out the emergence of unscrupulous leaders who would work against peace and drag countries into wars. This painful realisation made the leaders of the member countries almost customary to attend the annual meeting of the General Assembly where they have the liberty to dwell at length on the issues of concerns and seek peaceful resolutions of the conflicts. The Security Council is the special forum where the countries in conflict would debate, even trade charges against each other in order to seek a diplomatic settlement of the disputes. Unfortunately, the Security Council has not always been successful in avoiding war.
The United Nations is not the forum to issue threats and intimidation, use provocative language and invite the adversaries to armed conflicts. Trump did exactly what would escalate conflicts, wreck peace efforts and divide the member countries - a complete repudiation of the UN charter.
North Korea's leadership has not set an example of good behaviour. In defiance of the will of the international community it has tested medium to long-range missiles one after another. Their actions have not been approved by its close ally and neighbour China. The Security Council resolutions slamming sanctions against North Korea bear testimony of disapproval of Pyongyang's actions by both Beijing and Moscow. Given the tumultuous relations the Trump administration has developed with major powers, it appears a healthy development that the international community has acted unanimously against the reckless conduct of Pyongyang. It is diplomatically rational that Washington should take this positive relationship a step further and cultivate world opinion in favour of a united acceptable course of action. Trump's language of intimidation torpedoed the opportunity.
Pyongyang, as expected, made an angry reaction to Trump's threat. Kim Jong Un called Trump "a mentally deranged US dotard. I will make the man holding the prerogative of the supreme command in the US to pay dearly for his speech…… Whatever Trump might have expected, he will face results beyond his expectation." DPRK's Foreign Minister hinted that his country might test hydrogen bomb, a deadly arsenal, in response to Trump's threats. The trade of words has raised the tension at its height.
Trump in the same speech threatened to abrogate the nuclear deal that the United States had signed with Iran together with permanent members of the Security Council and Germany in 2015. He also said "Iran is a murderous regime" and placed it in the same category with "rogue nations such as North Korea."
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani made a measured response. He said "the nuclear agreement is a closed issue and cannot be extended or changed in any way. This is the building, the frame of which, if you take out a single brick, the entire building will collapse." He further elaborated, "This issue must be understood by the American officials. Either JCPOA (Joint comprehensive Plan of Action) will remain as it is in its entirety or it will cease to exist." Rouhani reminded the international community that "If any one exits the agreement, it means our hand is completely open to take any action that we see as beneficial to our country. The JCPOA has no other conditions. It is the JCPOA in its current form." Rouhani later told the American media executives that "Everyone will clearly see that Iran has lived up to its agreements and that the United States is therefore a country that cannot be trusted."
It is pertinent to note that France, Germany, UK, Russia and China - other signatories of the agreement - did not join the United States in finding faults with Iran. They indeed trust the IAEA (International Atomic and Energy Agency) which confirms that Tehran has been in compliance with JCPOA.
As the international community denounced Trump's bellicosity the US Defence Secretary James Mattes and the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson engaged in damage control mission. James Mattes reiterated "It is still a diplomatically led effort." Tillerson told "he was not discouraged by Rouhani's refusal to consider any kind of modification of the deal……. It always gets the darkest before you might have a breakthrough."
French President Emmanuel Macron, in his maiden speech at the General Assembly, defended the principle of global cooperation. He said the rhetoric about North Korea should be toned down and warned against abandoning the Iran nuclear deal.
China's People's Daily newspaper commented, "Trump's political chest-thumping is unhelpful, and it will only push the DPRK to pursue even riskier policies, because the survival of the regime is at stake." China believes both sides are to blame for the tensions. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "We resolutely condemn the nuclear missile adventures of Pyongyang in violation of the Security Council resolutions. But military hysteria is not just an impasse; it's a disaster…….. There is no alternative to political and diplomatic ways of settling the nuclear situation on the Korean Peninsula."
Ironically, Trump has equated himself at the same level as of Kim Jung Un. Both have lost credibility by their loose and vituperative remarks. Kim had made similar threats in the past, as did Trump. The people around the world are therefore bewildered and at the same time concerned at the present level of tension. They are not sure whom to trust and how much. French President Macron rightly cautioned, "Look at the map - if we talk of a military solution, we speak about lot of victims. Building peace is what we have to do in the region."
Washington has never been as isolated as it is now. European allies who had worked jointly with the United States on many crises ranging from Kosovo to Afghanistan to Ukraine are now highly sceptical of Trump's strategy. Nonetheless, they acted in cohesion to restrain Pyongyang. China has begun rolling back its banking operations in North Korea in adherence to sanction. In 2003, it halted the fuel supply to North Korea only to be resumed after Pyongyang mend fences with Beijing.
Trump has withdrawn from the Paris Climate agreement, abrogated the Trans Pacific Partnership deal and placed the North America Free Trade Agreement in jeopardy. He has threatened to slash funding to the United Nations and NATO. All these regressive steps will diminish US influence overseas and the vacuum thus created, would be gradually filled in by China.
Unless Trump is restrained in his deconstruction spree by the Congress, the United States would be reduced to a country like Portugal with limited role and influence abroad.
The writer is a former official of the United Nations.
