The Role of the Secretary-General of the United Nations in International Relations
| Date | 01 October 1959 |
| Author | A. M. James |
| Published date | 01 October 1959 |
| DOI | 10.1177/004711785900101203 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
THE ROLE OF THE SECRETARY-
GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
A. M. JAMES
IN a world in which the inevitable clash
of
interests
is
often accom-
panied by aharsh tone
and
an uncompromising manner, the greater
the respect shown,
or
ostensibly shown, to
an
Institution which
stands for the settlement
of
disputes in the least warlike manner
possible, the better is the outlook. And, as the regard in which an
institution is held will in
part
be due
to
the quality
and
reputation
of
its staff, the calibre
of
the man
at
the head
of
the United Nations
Secretariat is amatter
of
considerable importance. The example
of
Gunnar
Myrdal as Secretary-General
of
the United Nations Eco-
nomic Commission for Europe has indicated the potentialities which
an
office such as this holds, albeit here in acomparatively limited and
specialised province. In awider sphere Dag Hammarskjold,
Secretary-General
of
the United Nations since April
1953,
has
achieved remarkable renown. After months
of
wrangling over the
question
of
asuccessor to Trygve Lie, the veto-holding. members
of
the Security Council surprised the world by suddenly agreeing upon
"a
Swedish politician little known in international circles
"1.
Five years later, to mark the beginning
of
his second term
of
office,
the City
of
New York declared a "
Dag
Hammarskjold
Day"
and
granted him its freedom. At alunch to celebrate the occasion the
Mayor saw
fit
to describe Hammarskjold as "the foremost diplomat
of
the
world",
2which, even allowing for the nature
of
the occasion,
was avery considerable tribute.
It
indicates that the United
Nations Secretary-General is playing apart in international relations
which would have been inconceivable fifty, and improbable twenty-
five
years ago.
It
is
true that while the League
of
Nations was in gestation the
suggestion was made that the proposed Organisation's Secretary-
General should be apowerful official, and for him Lord Robert
Cecil favoured the title
of"
Chancellor".
These ideas were in the
air with aview to Venizelos, the eminent Greek statesman, holding
the Office, but with his refusal both its title
and
scope were pruned.
What emerged was the Secretary-Generalship, with aBritish civil
servant, Sir Eric Drummond, as the first incumbent.
On
paper the
position he held was one with apparently negligible political respon-
sibilities. The Secretary-General was to
"act
in
that
capacity"
at
all meetings
of
the League Assembly and Council (Article 6
of
the
1The London News Chronicle, April I,
1953.
IUnited Nations News (published weekly
by
the United Nations Information
Centre, London), April
15,
1958.
620
League Covenant); he was to convoke an immediate meeting
of
the
Council when asked to do so by any member
of
the League
in
acase
of
war
or
threat
of
war (Article I
I.
I); and in the case
of
any dispute
submitted to the Council he was to "make all necessary arrange-
ments for afull investigation and consideration
thereof"
(Article
15.1).
The fact that Drummond eschewed all publicity, limited
himself
at
League meetings very much to the role
of
the Organisa-
tion's self-effacing but competent Secretary, and undertook no
dramatic journeys heightened the readiness
of
many to regard him
as an administrator and little more: the majority
of
acommittee set
up in
1930
to examine the League Secretariat's functions played down
any idea that the Secretary-General might enjoy significant political
activities.l
This, however, implies asomewhat simplified view either
of
the
nature
of
politics, as something
in
which only those termed politi-
cians indulge,
or
of
the possibility
of
effectively dividing the province
of
the administrator from that
of
one playing at politics. Within a
State such as the United Kingdom, where civil servants are widely
acclaimed as being politically impartial in the advice they render,
it is not disputed that these neutral advisers may have avery con-
siderable influence on the country's policy. In that States are
not
obliged to turn to the Secretary-General
of
the United Nations for
advice, that official
is
in aweaker position than his national counter-
parts; but, on the other hand, it
is
he who
is
in the position, unknown
to national civil servants,
of
standing for the Institution which he
serves,
of
being its
liVing
embodiment, and the guardian
of
its con-
stitution: as such he
is
unlikely to be ignored by the Members,
nor
are they likely to think it wise to pay no attention to any comments
which he cares to convey to them. He will, therefore, be
in
aposition
to exert anoiseless leverage on those whom he serves, and the
minority
of
the
1930
committee mentioned above commented that,
"the
political influence
of
the Secretariat, and especially
of
its
principal officers,
is
in
fact enormous
".2
This conclusion was
probably over-drawn, but it
is
an indication
of
another, and more
compelling, point
of
view.
Drummond was constantly at work
behind the scenes and he acquired aconsiderable reputation as one
to whom confidences could
be
entrusted, and from whom could be
obtained as impartial asumming up
of
asituation as one would be
likely to get. This cautious and tactful approach was
in
accord with
Drummond's temperament and also represented awise appreciation
of
the extent to which it was prudent for him to go: had he attempted
to assert
in
amore positive manner what might be called the authority
of
the League, he would have received short shrift from its Members
and have found that this authority was very tenuous indeed. How-
ever vociferous some sections
of
the public in Anglo-Saxon countries
might
be
in
their support for the League, their governments, and
IS. M. Schwebel, The Secretary-General
0/
the United Nations, (1952),
2Ibid.
".,1
To continue reading
Request your trial