Helen Clark challenged sexism at the United Nations
Geoffrey P. Johnston
Helen Clark could very well be the best Secretary-General that the troubled United Nations never had.
Indeed, when the United Nations Security Council cast aside the tough, intelligent, and reform-minded Clark in favour of an establishment candidate, the UN demonstrated that it was stubbornly committed to the flawed status quo instead of embracing much needed change.
The United Nations is supposed to represent the best of the community of nations, a forum in which member states work together to promote peace and international security, while advancing human development, including the rights of women and children.
Unfortunately, the world body has fallen far short on many files, especially when it comes to protecting the most vulnerable people in the world from sexual abuse, exploitation, and rape perpetrated by UN peacekeepers, UN affiliated aid workers, and even UN officials.
The United Nations needs to undergo a drastic change in culture and urgently requires transformative leadership. But that would mean the Secretary-General would have to speak truth to power, reform the often secretive and ineffective institution, and end the culture of impunity that permits sexism and abhorrent behaviour to go unpunished. In short, it is past time for a strong, capable woman to lead the United Nations and drag the archaic institution into the 21st century.
In 2016, the United Nations was presented with a golden opportunity to embrace change and reform. At that time, the UN embarked on a supposedly more open and transparent process to select the ninth Secretary-General from a large field of candidates, including a number of highly qualified women.
When the race began, Helen Clark, still working hard as administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), was the odds on favourite to win the leadership. Indeed, women from around the world seemed genuinely excited by the prospect of ‘Aunty Helen’, as Clark is affectionately known, was campaigning hard for the top job at the UN, dominating the social media campaign, building support in the UN General Assembly, and visiting national capitals.
During the summer of 2016, I conducted a telephone interview with Helen Clark as she campaigned for the UN’s top job. At that point in the campaign, she had already visited 13 of the 15 national capitals of the member states sitting on the UN Security Council—the body that would select the next Secretary-General. All the while, she continued doing her “day job” at UNDP, which she led from 2009 to 2017. “It’s busy,” she said in the interview of her hectic work and campaign schedules.
“I really hope that in making the selection, the UN Security Council members will look at what the needs of the UN are at this time,” said Clark of the imperative to reform the world body.
“This (selection process) needs a global search for the best person for the job,” Clark said of the need to dispense with the usual UN politicking that tends to determine who becomes Secretary-General. “And in my opinion, it has to be someone like me, who has leadership and strong advocacy skills, and who has run a country, and has run a major organization, and knows how to get results.”
In the interview, Clark made a strong case in favour of her candidacy, declaring that her tenure as prime minister of New Zealand from 1999 to 2008 had prepared her to become the world’s top diplomat. “I’ve led a country,” she said. “I’ve represented my country at numerous summit events, bilateral meetings, so I very much understand how member states think, actually. I think that’s rather important to have had that experience.”
Another selling point was Clark’s global network of contacts. “I’ve got a huge Rolodex, which has only been improved in the seven years of being at UNDP,” she said of her extensive list of contacts.
“As prime minister of a country like New Zealand, I was across all areas of policy,” Clark continued. “So when I came to UNDP, there really was nothing in the range of issues that UNDP worked on--whether it was climate change or legal aid--that I didn’t know something about in my years of experience.”
In addition, she said that leading UNDP gave her “global experience working with countries across all political systems.”
Despite leading a UN agency and being considered the third most powerful person at the world body, Clark cast herself as an agent of change during the 2016 campaign. “The UN is struggling in a number of areas at the moment,” Clark told me.
But for all its faults, Clark declared that the United Nations was too important not to fix. “If we didn’t have it, we’d have to re-invent it,” she said of the UN.
“We might as well re-invent it into being more effective than it’s perceived,” she added.
Spring cleaning agenda
As a candidate, Helen Clark put forward a clearly articulated agenda. First, she pledged to continue to champion the development and environment agendas. “That’s been my bread and butter the last seven years,” she said.
Second, Clark aimed to change the UN’s “approach to peace and security, to try to get greater effectiveness.” She wanted to take a much more coherent and systemic view of peace and security issues. And this would have required: examining long-term development agendas; developing early warning systems and employing pro-active engagement when there are signs of conflict; and providing “ready support for mediation to try and sort out differences” before conflict erupts.
When a country falls into deep crisis and “everything has failed really,” said Clark, it becomes necessary to deploy peacekeepers. But too often, UN peacekeeping operations do not run smoothly. That’s why Clark said that the United Nations “need to tidy up the way peacekeeping operations are run.”
Third, Clark was committed to bolstering the “effectiveness and efficiency” of the UN. “Does it offer value for money to the member states?” she asked rhetorically in the 2016 interview. And she declared that the UN “needs a bit of spring cleaning.”
During the interview, Clark acknowledged the sexual abuse perpetrated by UN peacekeepers. “Absolutely zero tolerance for any such behaviour,” she declared when asked about various sex abuse controversies.
“The training of troops being deployed has to have, very prominent in it, the expectations of impeccable behaviour with respect to civilians,” said Clark. “And that means upholding the human rights (of civilians)—not abusing or extorting them.”
Clark said that decisive action should be taken when abuses occur. “When there is the slightest sign that something has gone wrong, obviously the person concerned must be removed immediately and should be sent home,” she said. “And if his whole platoon or whatever is involved, they should go home.”
However, the story should not end there, said Clark. “At home,” she continued, “they are expected to be investigated” and prosecuted if there is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing.
“If countries aren’t prepared to do that, then the UN needs to draw a red line, and say, ‘We can’t accept troops’ (from those nations),” she stated. “Because, we cannot have the image of the blue helmet continue to be tarnished by the gross, horrific behaviour that’s been in the headlines.”
What would Clark have done to ensure that UN bureaucrats act on sex abuse allegations involving peacekeepers? “Very strong signals need to be sent about that,” Clark replied. “If these allegations come in, they must immediately be investigated.”
At UNDP, when allegations of flawed or improper behaviour were made, Clark said that the agency took action right away. “We do not tolerate fraud, (or) sexual abuse,” she said in 2016. “We don’t shoot the messenger. We say, ‘What is behind this allegation?’”
Critique of the UN
From Clark’s perspective in 2016, the UN did a good job of leading on big development agenda issues, such as the environment. “But on the peace and security pillar,” she said, “I think it’s not seen to have done so well.”
“We need to innovate and review our approaches to crisis and conflict in the second decade of the 21st century,” she said. “We’re still acting as if we’re trying to prevent wars between nations and in the wake of World War II; it’s not the problem we’re primarily facing.”
Clark understood that in the 21st century, the primary job of UN peacekeepers isn’t to keep warring armies apart. “We’re faced with civil wars; we’re faced with terrorism and jihadism; and non-state actors of all kinds,” Clark explained.
“What has the UN got to say about how the tip over into chaos and anarchy and how to build back from these?” Clark asked rhetorically. And she pointed out that the UN has too many bureaucratic silos that don’t communicate well with each other.
“I think we need to be much more consciously linking the different pillars of our work across development, humanitarian, peace building, human rights, political—to make it add up to more than the sum of its parts,” she said of her plan to reorganize the world body.
Despite her qualifications, accomplishments and pro-active agenda, Helen Clark lost her bid to become the first woman Secretary-General. Instead, the Security Council selected an establishment candidate, a man. It was a bitter defeat for Clark and people hoping for a woman to finally break the glass ceiling at the United Nations.
My Year with Helen