Transcript
Manjeet Kripalani: The UN has received a rather unexpected birthday announcement this year, and that is the withdrawal of the U.S. from one of its key coordinating authorities on health – the WHO, allegedly for the latter’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic. This will have a serious impact on global health care. It also means the U.S. will not be at the WHO table in the next board meeting in February. What does this mean for the WHO and the UN given that the has been the top donor in its two-year budget ending 2023 with over $1.3 billion?
Ruchira Kamboj: Yes, you’re right. The U.S. has withdrawn from the WHO. Now, back to your question, what are the implications? China could potentially increase its influence within the WHO and global health governance. The U.S. has historically been one of the largest donors, and so if funding is cut, China could step into that gap, thereby filling the financial gap. Now, this would naturally increase Beijing’s ability to influence global health policies, and China could also likely expand the health portion of its Silk Road initiative to strengthen its ties with developing countries, countries that previously might have relied on U.S. support Finally, increased Chinese representation, potentially in who leadership positions. Also, one or two questions could be asked, how will the withdrawal create a shift in global leadership dynamics, enhancing China’s role in global health? Is this a rejection of multilateralism and its mutual obligations?
MK: So, in short, Ruchira, you’re saying the very reason that the U.S. has withdrawn, which is China, might actually defeat itself.
RK: Let’s wait and watch. Of course, the WHO representative has noted that they hope that the U.S. might reconsider. So, let’s wait and see because I think the practical implementation of this announcement will take effect one year later. So, there is time yet.
MK: With full-blown conflicts going on in Ukraine and West Asia, is it open season for the UN, since all kinds of experts are decrying this institution? Can you tell us some of the positives of the UN’s contribution to the world today?
RK: I think you used the word very well, Open Season. Yes. There are many who are saying that multilateralism is dying, if not already dead, and many have written the obituary, so to speak, of the United Nations. I think to some extent it is quite natural and understandable, because if the United Nations Security Council fails to keep the peace, then it is almost synonymous with the failure of the United Nations. However, there are some credits to the United Nations. Many of them, I would say, look at United Nations peacekeeping, where, incidentally, India has been a major contributor. Also look at the various successes of the United Nations in the sector of health, if you look at chickenpox and the excellent work that’s being done in polio eradication, and then, of course, the various efforts of the United Nations in terms of humanitarian assistance and with refugees. So, there are many areas where the UN has been very effective. I would also draw your attention to the fact that for the small states, and this is a large constituency, 108 small states, of which 38 are small island developing states. For them, the United Nations is very effective, a vital platform to raise their voices and concerns about issues that might otherwise be overlooked in the cacophony of noises. They have as much of a place in the United Nations as does any other large country, that is one country, one vote. So, I would say that the UN has worked very effectively in the past. There have been many instances where I’ve only scratched the tip of the iceberg, but certainly, I think when you look at the raging conflicts across the globe today, more than 100, as we are told, I think it’s quite understandable for people to say that the United Nations is failing.
MK: As you’ve pointed out, the UN has really seen quite remarkable changes in the world and in itself over the past 80 years. However, many of its core structural and procedural elements remain the same. So, while you were there, and you’re part of the entire network, Is there some talk of reassessments or audits underway of the UN’s operational framework, especially with regard to two elements? First is the representation and participation of emerging global powers like India, possibly in the UNSC and regions such as Africa and Latin America. Second, considering the rise of several alternate structures and plurilateral groupings like the G20, QUAD, BRICS, etc.
RK: The UN from time to time, undertakes audits to enhance its operational effectiveness. I remember, in the year 2000 there was a very important UN report called The Brahimi report, which came up actually with very good recommendations on making peacekeeping more effective. Then in 2004, there was the Kofi Annan report on threats, challenges and change, which in effect, suggested, amongst many other things, that the United Nations Security Council should be reformed and expanded to include both permanent and non-permanent members. In fact, I recall there were two models put forth by this report – Model A, which called for an expansion in both categories and Model B, which called for an expansion in non-permanent categories only. And then, more recently, in more recent times, there have been several reports, the most notable being the report in 2022 titled The New Agenda for Peace, no doubt, because of the new conflicts that had emerged, notably the Ukraine conflict in 2022. So, there have been efforts by the UN to reinvent itself, to make itself more relevant to the times – a UN 2.0, so to speak. As far as the representation of Countries like India in new structures within the United Nations Security Council is concerned, I think a lot has been done. I have drawn your attention to previous reports that have called for an expansion and a reform. I would say that the current Secretary General also has been very vocal in this regard. So, all of that is happening. It is another matter that while the reports are happening, the actual reform has not yet happened, that you’re all waiting for. That is the way forward.
MK: What will provoke that reform? Since India is now waiting, there are the chiefs of Germany, Japan, and Brazil, but the whole world is just waiting. Is there going to be a trigger because we have two wars and there’s still no trigger?
RK: Yes, that’s right. Normally people assume that when there is a war or when things turn upside down. Heaven knows a lot has turned upside down in recent times, including the COVID pandemic, but the desired reform hasn’t happened. Well, the short answer to that would be that the process is very complicated, and it potentially impacts the existing balance of power. So, it might not be the easiest of things to happen, but you never know when the next trigger is around the corner. Let’s leave it at that.
MK: India has not had a significant headquarters of any UN agency in eight years, the West dominates this, and even little Turkmenistan has a headquarters of a UN agency. Our BIMSTEC neighbour, Thailand has ESCAP. Why is that? What can we do to remedy it in order to reflect our emerging influence in the world?
RK: There are two UN bodies that are headquartered in India. The first is the WHO Southeast Asia regional office that is based in Delhi, and in fact, covers 11 countries. So that’s excellent. The other one is the more recent, Global Centre on Traditional Medicine, which is headquartered in Jamnagar and as far as I know, this centre is already operational. Several projects are underway, including data analytics, AI-based solutions and systematic reviews of traditional medicine practices. So, there you are.
MK: However, India doesn’t use its influence, because we could make the world lean one way or the other, but we don’t.
RK: I would like to tell you something that I’ve personally experienced through two postings at the United Nations. The voice of India at the UN is heard with a lot of respect. We are a voice of principle, a voice of reason. We are also seen as bridge builders. We have contributed across the entire spectrum of the agenda of the United Nations, which is very vast, from peace and security to development to human rights and now digital governance, including artificial intelligence. we have been eight-time members of the United Nations Security Council, where we contributed very positively and actively in the most recent tenure, to all of the United Nations’ various mandates. So overall, I think our influence is quite considerable. India is one of the leading voices of the Global South, a country that, as I’ve already said, contributes across the full spectrum of the United Nations activities, and a country that is recognised and acknowledged as such, bringing today’s solutions to the global top team.
MK: The largest funder to the UN contributes to 22% of its budget and China is next at 15%, followed by Japan at 8.5, and Germany at 6%. With the expressing frustration with the UN, China is only too willing to step in, and it already has, as our study in 2021 shows. How can India counter this influence of China in the UN system?
RK: Well, I would say we play our own game now, you know, we have a wonderful past in the early years of the United Nations. all of you would recall that India contributed immensely to the decolonisation agenda of the United Nations. As far as South Africa is concerned, one of the countries where I also served as ambassador, India was the very first country, you would recall, to inscribe apartheid on the agenda of the United Nations. Over the years, India has continued with that developing agenda, because the bulk of countries in the United Nations are developing countries, and our leadership with the South is acknowledged. I would draw your attention to the fact that very recently, when India extended a helping hand to many countries of the south during the course of the COVID pandemic, many senior officials in the United Nations including many ministers from many countries, publicly acknowledged India’s contribution. The altruism that was displayed by India during the course of the pandemic and that’s just one instance. There have been so many other occasions when India has stood its own ground and taken forward the agenda in its way. That, you would recall, was spelt out very clearly by the Prime Minister of India when we were hosting the G20 Summit, when he said that everything is interconnected. So, one Earth, one family, one future. I think India is walking that walk and talking that talk, and today is seen very positively by countries, at the United Nations, as a country that is caring, that is contributing very positively to the greater global good.
Manjeet Kripalani is the Executive Director, Gateway House.
Ruchira Kamboj is the Former Permanent Representative of India to the UN
Podcast produced by Radhika Udas.
This podcast was exclusively recorded for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can explore more exclusive content here.
Support our work here.
For permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in
©Copyright 2025 Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. All rights reserved. Any unauthorised copying or reproduction is strictly prohibited.