The InterDependent

It wasn’t long after the Obama administration took over in Washington that speculation began about the likelihood of Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon getting a second term or not. His election in 2006 (he took office in January 2007) was always viewed around the United Nations as bearing the stamp of the Bush administration; in particular of John Bolton, then the acerbic American ambassador to the UN. Would the Obama team back Ban for a second term?

The question, dormant in recent months, revived when US diplomats were asked by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2009 to spy on the UN leadership, including Ban (who was not referred to by name) according to a document released by WikiLeaks this week. Diplomats at the US-UN mission and elsewhere were asked to find out what governments were saying about the next secretary-general race. The Security Council has about a year to make its choice; the next term begins in January 2012.

The instructions were terse. Discover “Views of member states … to include preferred candidates and candidates lacking UN member support.” That followed the request to ferret out a raft of information on all top UN officials, including “Personalities, biographic and biometric information, roles, effectiveness [and] management styles.” The US State Department, and what the directive called the wider American “intelligence community,” was also interested in the secretary-general’s interaction with key Secretariat offices, other UN bodies and governments.

It would be easy to read too much into this 2009 directive. Getting a handle on the secretary-general has always been an American preoccupation, as it has been for other countries. When read in the context of a long State Department document mostly devoted to international crises and issues before the Security Council, the snooping on UN officials – apart from collecting personal information like biometric details, credit card and frequent-flier numbers – is part of routine diplomacy. At the UN, spying of all kinds has never stopped. It is too rich an international mix to be ignored and, at its most sophisticated, espionage – including wiretapping -- is not conducted by genuine diplomats.

The directive to diplomats also asks for detailed information about policy attitudes of other Security Council members and speculation about whether they might vote with or against UN interests. The US is also interested in what nongovernmental organizations are up to and their possible influence. Journalists collect such information all the time.

Michael Gross/US State Department

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the State Department in April 2010. Clinton sent a directive to diplomats in 2009 asking for information about Security Council attitudes toward a second term for Ban.

Stephen Schlesinger, a contributor to The InterDependent and the author of “Act of Creation: The Founding of the United Nations,” is among those close to the organization who sees no movement on the part of Washington to block a second Ban term. Schlesinger said in an interview that there have been only two occasions when a secretary-general was denied re-election. The Chinese (mercifully, it turned out) vetoed Kurt Waldheim’s bid for a third term in 1980, and the administration of Bill Clinton denied Boutros Boutros-Ghali a second term in 1996, mostly for domestic political reasons after an anti-UN mood gripped Congress.

In recent months, the prevailing opinion around the UN has been that while diplomats may fault Ban Ki-moon for working too much within a close circle of aides and for not being a visionary or an inspiring leader, he would have to commit a major blunder to lose his footing in the Security Council and risk a veto. Besides, Asia would want to keep that seat and, at least at this point, there are no regional challengers.

Ban proved in 2005 to be a consummate behind-the-scenes candidate, rounding up support among both council members and government leaders generally, since all nations vote when the General Assembly finally acts on the council’s nominee. This time, however, Ban would have to rely on his record if challenged, and that would mean a more public campaign.