Setback in New York

New Delhi has no reason to be surprised by the U.S.' rejection of Shashi Tharoor's candidature for the top U.N. post.

IT has been described as one of the most transparent elections to the top post of the premier international organisation. Unlike in the past, there were no eleventh hour surprises. The South Korean candidate Ban Ki-Moon, the front-runner from the beginning of the race for the new Secretary-General of the United Nations, has emerged the winner. He will assume office after the present incumbent Kofi Annan completes his term in December. India's candidate Shashi Tharoor formally withdrew from the contest after the final "straw poll" held on October 2 confirmed Ban Ki-Moon as the clear leader. As in the previous polls, he got the backing of all the five permanent Security Council members. He was also the only candidate who got more than the minimum nine votes needed for approval. The Security Council will now forward Ban's name to the General Assembly for endorsement, a mere formality.

Ban's ascension as the next Secretary-General was virtually guaranteed when all the five permanent Security Council members supported his candidature. To add to India's discomfiture, one of the permanent members actually voted against Tharoor's candidature.

To get the top job in the U.N., the support of all the permanent Security Council members is a must. While announcing his withdrawal, Tharoor thanked the Indian government for having nominated him as its official candidate. His nomination had evoked a lukewarm response from the Indian Foreign Office.

The decision was taken at the Prime Minister's Office without prior consultations with South Block. On his way back home from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit in Havana, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had described Tharoor as an "outstanding candidate" for the post of Secretary-General of the U.N.

The decision to back Tharoor's candidature came as a surprise to many as India had put its hat in the ring for a permanent seat in a restructured Security Council. The Secretary-General's post, by tradition, is always held by an individual from a country that does not have a seat in the Council. Once elected, the Secretary-General usually gets to serve two five-year terms. New Delhi, according to many observers, had sent a wrong signal to the international community by staking its prestige on the candidature of Tharoor.

This could have been interpreted as New Delhi giving more importance to the post of Secretary-General than to a seat at the "high table" in a reformed U.N. Another point of view is that India could have gained more leverage if it had instead thrown its weight behind another candidate from either South Asia or Southeast Asia. Ban's main supporters were the United States and China.

Indian officials have acknowledged that in all the three previous straw polls, it was the U.S. that had cast a "pink slip" against Tharoor's candidature. President George W. Bush had clearly stated in July that his administration would be supporting a candidate from East Asia. The only East Asian candidate in the fray was from South Korea. The "straw poll" is an informal one conducted among the five permanent Security Council members and the 10 rotating members of the Council. New Delhi must have been aware that Ban was Washington's preferred candidate.

The effusive praise heaped upon the South Korean candidate by the controversial American Ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton, after the concluding straw poll, is an illustration of the close ties Ban enjoys with the Bush administration. "The United States is very pleased with the outcome," Bolton told the media in New York in the first week of October. For his part, Ban has pledged that his top priority would be the reform of the management and finances of the U.N. This has also been the long-standing demand of the Bush administration.

The history of the U.N. has shown that strong-willed and independent personalities have rarely been elected to the top post. On the few occasions that Secretary-Generals have taken a principled stance, the U.S. was quick to criticise them strongly. Boutros Boutros-Ghali was denied a second term in office when he decided to be more even handed in world affairs. When Kofi Annan raised his voice against the U.S. invasion of Iraq and other unlawful acts, he found his wings clipped soon after. The charge of financial impropriety against his son Kojo in the Iraq "oil for food" deal seemed to weigh him down during his last years in office.

New Delhi has no reason to be surprised by the turn of events although it claims a "special strategic relationship" with Washington. When it comes to key decisions, Washington has invariably stood by tried and tested allies. Until the 1970s, South Korea owed its very existence to the U.S. Even as South Korea prospered from the 1980s, the U.S. Army took care of its security. Seoul was a trusted ally of the West during the Cold War.

However, in the past decade, South Korea has been trying to free itself from the apron strings of Washington and follow an independent foreign policy. The present South Korean government has demanded a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops from the Korean peninsula.

It was evident from the outset that Tharoor was facing an uphill contest. Ban had started his campaign much before the South Korean government made an official announcement about his candidature.

The other candidates in the field were Jayantha Dhanapala of Sri Lanka, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Thailand, Surakiart Sathirathai, Prince Zeid al Hussein of Jordan, Vaira Vike-Freilberga, the President of Latvia, and Ashraf Ghani, a former Finance Minister of Afghanistan.

Dhanapala withdrew from the fray in late September. Interestingly, the Sri Lankan government then chose to back the South Korean candidate.

The Thai candidate's chances receded after the military ousted the civilian government of which Sathirathai was an important member. The Latvian Prime Minister, who was a late entrant, was not given much of a chance, especially as she did not have the support of Russia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Latvia has been following an anti-Russian foreign policy. Besides, there was a consensus that the next Secretary-General should be from Asia. The last Asian to hold the post was the Myanmarese diplomat U Thant, from 1961 to 1971. To Tharoor's credit, despite the odds, he managed to put up a credible fight till the last "straw poll" on October 2.

Ban, described by his contemporaries as "efficient and soft-spoken", had the total support and commitment of the South Korean government. Seoul apparently worked overtime to get the support of developing countries.

It gave millions of dollars as aid to countries in sub-Saharan Africa before officially announcing Ban's candidature. South Korean officials were in Havana during the recent NAM summit to lobby for him.

There is some speculation that Ban's anointment as the next Secretary-General was an important factor that could have influenced Pyongyang to announce that it was preparing for a nuclear test.

As Secretary-General, Ban will have to deal with the crisis that threatens to erupt soon on the Korean peninsula. As one intimately involved in South Korea's nuclear talks with North Korea until now, he will be facing a diplomatic predicament of sorts as soon as he takes office.

During much of his career as a South Korean diplomat, the Koreas did not have normal relations. Ban has, however, claimed that he is the best man to deal with North Korea given his experience in tackling the nuclear issue with Pyongyang.

In fact, the Deputy Head of the North Korean mission at the U.N. told a South Korean newspaper that Ban's election as U.N. Secretary-General would be "good for the Korean people" and that "non-aligned nations have a good feeling about him".

After North Korea test-fired missiles in July, Ban had opposed American proposals for more stringent sanctions against Pyongyang. He has been credited with being "extremely apolitical" and being a man willing to listen to all sides. Ban has never hidden his close working relationship with Washington but he has insisted that this will not come in the way of his functioning. He said that the leaders of the developing world also knew that he was "their friend".

After Tharoor's exit from the race, India has once again started refocusing on the more important need to restructure the Security Council. India's Ambassador to the U.N., Nirupam Sen, in a speech delivered in early October, blamed the Council for "inaction" as tragic events occurred around the world. He said the failure could be attributed to the "unrepresentative character" of the Council. He said that developing countries remain "grossly under-represented" in the Council, although most of the Council's decisions affect them.