The Problem With “Do As I say, Not as I do (or did)!
Member States Should Focus More On Bringing Their Own Houses In Order
Author’s note: For lack of a better term, this article refers to particular groups of states as the West, developing nations, and developed nations. We understand that these terms are somewhat archaic and have been criticized for their colonialist and racist connotations, and it is not our intention to offend anyone. We simply cannot find a better term to point out general trends.
Over the last several sessions in different committees, a familiar pattern has emerged: States seem to be much more willing to tell others what to do than to take action themselves. This has taken two forms. The first, more developed nations criticizing less developed nations for practices they also used in their developing stages and have since phased out. The second, various countries advocating for principles they hardly adhere to in practice. Both these types of diplomatic hypocrisy can have a serious negative impact on the success of a debate and the trust between member states. Let’s take a closer look.
The UNEA has assembled this year to discuss the impact of Covid-19 on the environment. Early on, some Western states started drawing attention to many developing countries’ lack of environmental protection policies, and praising their own advancements in creating these policies. However, it is easily forgotten that not every nation is at the same stage of development. As the delegate of Venezuela pointed out, in a country ravaged by poverty it can prove difficult to procure the funds to protect the environment, and even more difficult to convince the people that this is the best way for funds to be allocated while their children suffer. If we go back in time to England’s industrial age, and indeed any developed nation’s early stages, we observe that the emphasis was on growth of the economy, despite the cost to people’s livelihoods and the environment. Of course one can say that they were not aware of global warming and the effects of environmental degradation. However, practices such as child labour and poor labour laws, which developing countries are criticized for today, were recognized to be bad at that time too. In addition, many nations who have become too developed to have a need for such controversial practices are still all too happy to make use of them in the form of outsourcing labour to developing countries. It’s a bit rich to criticize Africa for using child labour while drinking the coffee these children grow. Naturally, the picture isn’t this simple and there are many factors at play. But we can’t pretend every country must operate exactly the same because we have global standards now, when the realities of some countries are vastly different from those in the West.
The other hypocrisy is member states pointing out each other’s wrong-doings while being unable or unwilling to acknowledge these same misdeeds in their own country. As the delegate of Mexico in the UNODC pointed out, countries such as the Russian Federation are all too comfortable calling out other countries’ human rights violations and advocating for action on paper, while such violations have always been and are still rampant in Russia. In our current age of information, we are becoming more aware of such hypocritical accusations. Only recently, a report alleged that a doctor in an ICE detention camp in the US performed forced hysterectomy on an immigrant woman, all while the US is imposing sanctions on China over their internment of Uyghur Muslims. This is nothing new. Nations have always taken privileges for themselves that they don’t want other countries to have. However, it poses a growing issue in the United Nations. How can trust and cooperation be expected when developing countries feel treated unfairly, and many nations have growing suspicions that what nations expect from others vs. what they are willing to do themselves is not the same? How can we still believe in each other’s good intentions and honest commitment when it becomes clear that anyone can sign a resolution without the intention of committing to it?
However, not everything is bleak. While there has been plenty of the usual hypocrisy, we have also seen many honest acceptances of blame, and genuine willingness to face issues head-on. Many countries were willing to acknowledge the need for action in their own nations as well, and were happy to accept help from the community in better themselves. We believe future discussion should move away from the blame game that characterizes some relationships between UN member states, and a willingness to find solutions that accept every country’s unique position and capabilities. Only when states are not constantly under pressure to defend themselves can they become productive solution seekers.