Latest / Diplomacy and International Relations / Denmarks work in UN organizations

Transcript

Denmarks work in UN organizations · Diplomacy and International Relations

• 0:00
  Welcome to Diplomacy and International Relations by
• 0:02
  Bastian Freiborg. Great.
• 0:04
  To be here. Today we're doing a deep dive
• 0:06
  really getting into Denmark's, let's say, evolving role on the
• 0:10
  global stage. Yeah, it's a fascinating case
• 0:12
  study. Our mission really is to unpack
• 0:15
  how a well, a relatively smaller nation like Denmark manages to
• 0:19
  have such a significant impact, how it navigates these really
• 0:23
  complex global challenges. And how it champions key
• 0:26
  agendas. Exactly.
• 0:28
  Especially thinking about its recent return to the UN Security
• 0:30
  Council, which is huge, and also its, you know, ambitious
• 0:34
  international climate goals, right?
• 0:36
  What can Denmark's approach teach us about international
• 0:39
  relations today in the 21st century?
• 0:42
  You know, it's actually quite remarkable how Denmark often
• 0:44
  seems to, well, punch above its weight in these international
• 0:48
  forums. That phrase comes up a lot,
• 0:50
  doesn't it? It does, and I think it's not
• 0:51
  just about showing up, it's more about consistently building
• 0:56
  diplomatic capital overtime trust.
• 0:58
  So it's like a long game. Precisely.
• 1:00
  For a smaller nation, that kind of trust and reliability can
• 1:06
  often be a more potent form of power than, say, sheer military
• 1:10
  might. Interesting.
• 1:11
  It lets the mediate, you know, step in where larger nations,
• 1:15
  maybe with more via self interests, often can't.
• 1:19
  Or wow. That's a really powerful point,
• 1:21
  and it connects directly to the the big news everyone's been
• 1:24
  talking about lately, The. Security Council seat.
• 1:26
  Yes, Denmark successful bid for a seat on the UN Security
• 1:29
  Council for the 2025, 2020 six term.
• 1:32
  That was all finalized back on June 7th, 2024.
• 1:35
  And the support they got. Wow, incredible, right?
• 1:38
  184 votes out of 190 participating member states.
• 1:42
  That actually made them the top scorer among all five of the
• 1:45
  newly elected members. Which also included Greece,
• 1:47
  Somalia, Pakistan and Panama. You know that kind of
• 1:51
  overwhelming support. It doesn't just happen by
• 1:53
  accident. No, you have to assume not.
• 1:55
  It really reflects decades of consistent engagement in
• 1:58
  multilateralism and building that reputation for, well,
• 2:01
  principled diplomacy. And this isn't their first time
• 2:03
  either. Not at all.
• 2:04
  This will actually be Denmark's fifth time serving on this
• 2:08
  crucial body. Their last term was back in
• 2:11
  2005, 2006. So they know the ropes, so to
• 2:14
  speak. They do.
• 2:15
  It's a recurring, kind of trusted role they're stepping
• 2:18
  back into. Denmark's Foreign Minister Lars
• 2:21
  Look Erasmussen, He really emphasized this vision for the
• 2:24
  term. He said the level of support
• 2:26
  actually obliges Denmark. Obliges them to act.
• 2:30
  Right to act as an honest bridge builder.
• 2:32
  That's the phrase he used. The goal being to foster
• 2:35
  dialogue, common decisions. Which sounds, frankly,
• 2:39
  incredibly challenging right now.
• 2:40
  Especially now, yeah, given the state of great power relations
• 2:43
  just within the Council itself. It absolutely is a huge
• 2:46
  challenge, but you know, it's crucial to remember that even
• 2:49
  without having veto power these elected members, they can
• 2:52
  significantly influence decisions.
• 2:54
  How does that work in practice? Well, think about it.
• 2:56
  We've seen examples where elected members managed to
• 2:58
  collaborate quite effectively on really complex, contentious
• 3:02
  issues like the situation involving Israel and Gaza.
• 3:05
  They often provide the path to consensus precisely because they
• 3:10
  aren't always bound by the same kind of national interests that
• 3:13
  frequently deadlock the permanent 5 members, the P5.
• 3:17
  OK. So they have a bit more
• 3:18
  flexibility maybe? You could say that they can
• 3:20
  focus on building those bridges. So given this commitment to
• 3:24
  being a bridge builder, yeah, what specific areas, what
• 3:27
  concrete things will Denmark be focusing on during its term?
• 3:31
  What are their priorities? Well, they've outlined a vision
• 3:34
  centered around 4 key areas. OK, first defending
• 3:37
  international law. That includes humanitarian law,
• 3:40
  universal human rights. And their approach here is quite
• 3:44
  interesting. They're really emphasizing
• 3:46
  constructive dialogue, even with states that might not be
• 3:49
  compliant. It's not just about
• 3:50
  condemnation. That constructive dialogue part
• 3:53
  definitely stands out. I mean, especially now, how does
• 3:56
  that practically work with nations, you know, actively
• 3:58
  violating international law? Is it about finding common
• 4:01
  ground somewhere? Well, I think it's probably less
• 4:04
  about finding common ground on the violations themselves and
• 4:07
  more about maintaining a a channel, a channel for
• 4:10
  influence, for clearly articulating norms.
• 4:13
  It's a long game, as you said earlier.
• 4:14
  OK, keeping the door open. What's the second area?
• 4:17
  Second, they're focused on adapting crisis management and
• 4:21
  conflict prevention to, well, new global realities, which
• 4:26
  means a specific part of this is strengthening relations with the
• 4:29
  African Union, the AU. OK, regional partnerships.
• 4:32
  Exactly. And this raises a really
• 4:34
  critical question, I think, how can the UN better partner with
• 4:38
  regional bodies like the AAU to tackle continent specific
• 4:41
  challenges effectively and equitably?
• 4:45
  Good question. And the third priority?
• 4:47
  The third is strengthening the Women, Peace and Security
• 4:50
  agenda, the WPS agenda really pushing to empower women's
• 4:53
  participation in peace processes and conflict.
• 4:56
  Work always important. And the last one.
• 4:58
  Finally, and this is quite ambitious, they want to adapt
• 5:00
  the Security Council itself to new global challenges and power
• 5:04
  balances. Wow, OK, taking on the structure
• 5:06
  itself, well, acknowledging the need for it, this point really
• 5:10
  speaks to that well known criticism that the UN system
• 5:14
  doesn't always reflect current global power dynamics.
• 5:17
  Like the fact that India, soon to be the world's most populous
• 5:20
  nation, still doesn't have a permanent seat.
• 5:23
  Precisely so. Denmark's willingness to even
• 5:25
  put this on their agenda, it points to that broader goal of
• 5:29
  achieving a more representative and hopefully more effective
• 5:32
  global governance structure, keeping the Council relevant in
• 5:35
  a multipolar world. Yeah, because that structure,
• 5:37
  the Council's famous structure with the five permanent members,
• 5:40
  China, France, Russia, UKUSA, all holding veto power, it's so
• 5:46
  often leads to gridlock. Absolutely.
• 5:48
  So the real question for Denmark's term, I suppose, is
• 5:51
  how does an elected member without that veto actually
• 5:54
  navigate and influence things, especially when the P5
• 5:58
  frequently use their veto for, let's face it, national
• 6:01
  interests. That veto power is, without a
• 6:03
  doubt the council's biggest structural challenge.
• 6:05
  We've seen its impact so vividly, haven't we, in major
• 6:07
  conflicts like Ukraine, like Gaza, where permanent members
• 6:11
  have used the veto, often hindering the council's ability
• 6:14
  to act decisively. But this creates A fascinating
• 6:17
  dynamic, actually. How so?
• 6:18
  It makes the elected members ability to build consensus, to
• 6:22
  craft creative solutions, even more critical.
• 6:24
  It becomes less about wielding raw power and maybe more about
• 6:28
  the art of persuasion, coalition building, diplomacy.
• 6:31
  Which brings us to that kind of paradox, maybe How much
• 6:35
  influence can a small state really have?
• 6:37
  There's Niels Neglucia from the Norwegian Institute of
• 6:41
  International Affairs and UPI. He has some interesting thoughts
• 6:45
  on this. Yeah, his insights are really
• 6:46
  relevant here. He argues that small states can
• 6:49
  indeed influence the Council's agenda.
• 6:51
  But, and this is the important part, it requires them to set
• 6:55
  aside narrow national interests and not use the Council, as I
• 6:59
  think his phrase was, a private catwalk for international
• 7:02
  politics. A private catwalk.
• 7:04
  I like that. It's memorable, isn't it?
• 7:07
  His point is really crucial though.
• 7:08
  It's about leveraging maybe moral authority, diplomatic
• 7:12
  skill, rather than just hard power or national grandstanding.
• 7:15
  So substance over style. In a way, yes.
• 7:18
  And despite all the pressures, all the ongoing conflicts, the
• 7:21
  Council still remains this a vital forum for dialogue between
• 7:24
  the major powers. That continued discussion, even
• 7:28
  when agreement is incredibly difficult.
• 7:31
  It's essential for maintaining at least some semblance of
• 7:34
  international order. And Denmark's goal is to help
• 7:36
  keep that dialogue productive. That seems to be the aim.
• 7:40
  And it's not just talk, is it? Denmark has already put this
• 7:43
  bridge builder idea into action. They recently chaired an open
• 7:47
  debate back during their March presidency.
• 7:49
  That's right, it was called advancing adaptability in UN
• 7:52
  Peace Operations, Responding to new realities.
• 7:55
  Quite a title. Indeed, But the initiative
• 7:58
  itself is incredibly timely. It connects directly to these
• 8:01
  ongoing reform efforts happening within the UN system, including
• 8:05
  the UN Secretary its own upcoming review of peace
• 8:08
  operations. So it feeds into a bigger
• 8:10
  process. Exactly the the impetus for this
• 8:13
  debate came straight from the Pact for the Future, you know, a
• 8:16
  key outcome from the 2024 summit of the future that pack
• 8:20
  specifically called for adapting peace operations to these
• 8:23
  increasingly complex challenges. We're seeing, OK.
• 8:26
  It also sort of sets the for major upcoming events like the
• 8:29
  2025 UN Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin and the fourth UN
• 8:34
  Peace Building Architecture Review.
• 8:36
  So Denmark isn't just sitting back.
• 8:38
  They're actively shaping the conversation.
• 8:40
  Very much so, and they're doing it as part of this peacekeeping
• 8:43
  trio initiative alongside Pakistan and the Republic of
• 8:46
  Korea collaboration again. So what were the key points that
• 8:50
  came out of that debate? What did it tell us about where
• 8:53
  peacekeeping might be heading? Well, the debate really hit on
• 8:56
  some critical issues. Things like adapting operations
• 8:59
  across the the full peace continuum from prevention to
• 9:03
  stabilization to long term peace building, aligning mission
• 9:07
  mandates better with evolving threats, and emphasizing what
• 9:11
  they often call the primacy of politics using diplomacy as the
• 9:14
  main tool. And the secretary general,
• 9:16
  Gutierrez, he has his own vision too, right?
• 9:19
  He does. He's talked about needing more
• 9:21
  nimble, adaptable and effective mission models in his A New
• 9:25
  Agenda for Peace. It's really a vision for
• 9:27
  peacekeeping that's less about, you know, static large
• 9:30
  deployments. On the ground indefinitely.
• 9:34
  Right, and more about dynamic, politically driven interventions
• 9:37
  that can adjust quickly. That vision sounds vital, but
• 9:41
  also bumps up against some pretty significant geopolitical
• 9:44
  tensions, doesn't it? Especially around peacekeeping
• 9:46
  mandates. Oh, absolutely.
• 9:48
  One big challenge is this whole issue of host state consent.
• 9:51
  We've actually seen several missions having to pack up and
• 9:53
  leave in recent years because the host government withdrew
• 9:57
  consent. Exactly.
• 9:58
  That's a major hurdle. And Gutierrez, he's been a very
• 10:01
  vocal champion for a pretty ground breaking shift here,
• 10:03
  which is empowering African LED peace support operations with
• 10:07
  dedicated predictable UN funding.
• 10:10
  The AU partnership again. Yes.
• 10:13
  This initiative was formalized in a key resolution, Resolution
• 10:16
  2719, just last December. The idea is to address these
• 10:20
  long standing problems of underfunding and frankly,
• 10:23
  inequity and peacekeeping efforts, especially in Africa.
• 10:26
  Even that resolution, that funding mechanism, it's facing
• 10:29
  some pushback, isn't it? Particularly from the US side or
• 10:31
  parts of it? That's right.
• 10:33
  There's been significant opposition.
• 10:34
  For example, US Senator James Risch voiced strong concerns
• 10:38
  about using Resolution 2719 to fund the AU mission in Somalia
• 10:43
  AUS Umm. What was his concern?
• 10:45
  His argument was that it would essentially lock the US into
• 10:48
  perpetual funding through its dues to the UN, which he framed
• 10:52
  as a disservice to American taxpayers.
• 10:54
  So it's a funding fight. Well, yes, but it's also more
• 10:57
  than just funding. It reflects these deeper
• 11:01
  philosophical disagreements within the council about the
• 11:03
  very scope and nature of peacekeeping.
• 11:05
  What do you mean? Some council members, notably
• 11:08
  China and Russia and potentially the US under a different
• 11:10
  administration, tend to resist prioritizing what they see as
• 11:14
  thematic issues. Like human rights, WPS, climate
• 11:17
  change. Exactly.
• 11:19
  In peacekeeping mandates, they prefer to keep the focus
• 11:22
  strictly on what they consider the core issues of basic
• 11:25
  security. Which raises a huge question,
• 11:28
  Can peacekeeping truly be effective in the long run if it
• 11:31
  ignores these interconnected challenges that often fuel the
• 11:34
  conflicts in the first place? That's the crux of the debate.
• 11:37
  It's a fundamental tension. OK, so we've seen how Denmark is
• 11:40
  positioning itself in the complex world of security and
• 11:43
  peace. Let's shift gears a bit now and
• 11:46
  look at another area where they're equally ambitious global
• 11:50
  climate action. Yes, another major focus.
• 11:52
  Is that punching above its white strategy working as effectively
• 11:56
  when it comes to the wealthy, enormous challenge of the
• 11:59
  climate crisis? This is definitely a crucial
• 12:02
  area where Denmark really aims to lead by example, the Danish
• 12:05
  Council on climate Change, the DCCC, they put out a really
• 12:10
  insightful analysis back in November 2023, called Denmark's
• 12:14
  Global Climate Action. And what did it find?
• 12:16
  Well, it acknowledges that Denmark has impressive
• 12:19
  territorial targets. You know, a 70% emissions
• 12:21
  reduction by 2030 compared to 1990 levels, aiming for net 0 by
• 12:26
  2050. Strong goals.
• 12:28
  Strong. But the Dan CCC points out that
• 12:30
  Denmark's global footprint, mainly from international
• 12:33
  transport and especially from consumption, is substantial and
• 12:36
  it's not fully covered by those current goals.
• 12:39
  So even with those ambitious targets at home, their global
• 12:42
  consumption habits mean they're effectively kind of exporting
• 12:45
  emissions. That's the issue.
• 12:46
  That's a paradox, isn't it? I think many listeners might
• 12:49
  find that genuinely surprising. How is Denmark looking to tackle
• 12:53
  that? It really is a paradox, and it
• 12:55
  applies to many developed nations, not just Denmark.
• 12:58
  The DCCC made some pretty strong recommendations.
• 13:01
  Like what? For international transport,
• 13:03
  shipping and aviation, they recommend setting a net zero
• 13:06
  target by 2050, with interim targets starting from 2035.
• 13:11
  This would cover emissions from fuels bunkered, you know, loaded
• 13:15
  in Danish ports and airports. Even though those emissions
• 13:17
  aren't currently counted in Denmark's main territorial
• 13:20
  target. Correct.
• 13:21
  They're reported separately to the UN, but the idea is to take
• 13:24
  responsibility for them. The UK and France are apparently
• 13:28
  exploring similar approaches, trying to capture a nation's
• 13:31
  full climate impact. OK.
• 13:32
  And what about the consumption footprint that sounds even?
• 13:35
  Trickier. It's striking.
• 13:36
  The DCCC estimates Denmark's consumption based footprint at
• 13:40
  around 63,000,000 tons of CO2 equivalent per year.
• 13:44
  Wow. Or about 11 tons per person.
• 13:46
  Now, to put that in perspective, that's among the highest in the
• 13:49
  EU and it's a staggering 50% higher than Denmark's own
• 13:53
  territorial emissions. 50% higher.
• 13:56
  It's like being really careful about recycling at home but
• 13:58
  buying tons of stuff made in factory overseas that pump out
• 14:02
  emissions. That's a good analogy, exactly.
• 14:04
  So the DCCC argues Denmark needs to tackle that global impact
• 14:08
  too. They recommend setting a
• 14:09
  benchmark in the Global Climate Strategy for, say, a 5060%
• 14:14
  reduction in consumption emissions by 2035 compared to
• 14:18
  2020 levels. To stop just shifting emissions
• 14:21
  abroad through imports. Precisely, they also recommended
• 14:25
  a benchmark specifically for emissions linked to public
• 14:28
  procurement government spending, which was a hefty 16 million
• 14:31
  tons CO2 E just from about €50 billion spent in 2021.
• 14:36
  It's about taking responsibility for the whole supply chain then.
• 14:39
  Yes, the full chain of climate impact.
• 14:41
  And they're also pushing for a clear benchmark for Denmark's
• 14:44
  annual climate finance contributions helping developing
• 14:47
  countries. Yes, post 2025, making sure it
• 14:50
  aligns with what's considered Denmark's fair contribution
• 14:54
  towards the global climate finance goals set under the
• 14:57
  Paris Agreement. This is where that positive
• 14:59
  influence, that leadership role comes back in, isn't it?
• 15:02
  Absolutely. Denmark has shown real strength
• 15:04
  in climate diplomacy. For instance, they were
• 15:08
  instrumental in founding initiatives like the Beyond Oil
• 15:11
  and Gas Alliance, BOGA. Right, phasing out fossil fuel
• 15:14
  production. And the declaration on 0
• 15:15
  emission shipping by 2050, they're actively collaborating
• 15:18
  with, I think it's 24 of the world's largest economies on
• 15:21
  accelerating the green energy transition.
• 15:24
  So they're not just talking, they're actively building
• 15:26
  coalitions for action. This raises a really interesting
• 15:29
  tension, doesn't it? Yeah, the Paris, this agreement
• 15:32
  also has this broader goal of aligning all financial flows,
• 15:36
  public and private, with low emission development.
• 15:40
  A huge goal. Article 2.1 C.
• 15:42
  And the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on
• 15:44
  Climate Change, they've noted there's been very limited global
• 15:47
  progress on that front. They say we need something like
• 15:50
  a three to six fold increase in green investments.
• 15:53
  It's a critical tension point, you're right.
• 15:55
  And it's not just a challenge for Denmark, of course.
• 15:57
  But even with Denmark's leadership and climate
• 15:59
  diplomacy, reports show that some Danish banks and pension
• 16:04
  funds continue to finance fossil fuel production.
• 16:06
  Which directly contradicts warnings from global authorities
• 16:09
  like the International Energy Agency, the IEA.
• 16:12
  Exactly. The IEA has been crystal clear.
• 16:16
  New fossil fuel projects are simply incompatible with keeping
• 16:19
  global warming below the 1.5°C target.
• 16:23
  So for Denmark, it presents this internal challenge, maybe an
• 16:27
  opportunity to lead by example there too.
• 16:29
  I think so. Pushing for stronger financial
• 16:32
  regulations domestically that truly align public and private
• 16:35
  finance with global climate goals.
• 16:37
  It demonstrates that bridge building maybe also extends to
• 16:40
  ensuring internal consistency. OK, connecting all these pieces,
• 16:45
  what does this all mean for Denmark's wider commitment to
• 16:47
  the Sustainable Development Goals?
• 16:49
  The SDGS, they've always seemed very strong on those.
• 16:52
  They have Denmark has consistently shown strong
• 16:54
  commitment and really leadership in achieving the UNS 17 SDGS
• 16:59
  which were adopted back in 2015 I.
• 17:01
  Remember seeing rankings? Yes.
• 17:02
  Denmark was actually ranked #2 globally way back in 2016 by the
• 17:06
  Sustainable Development Solutions Network, or SDSN, for
• 17:09
  its progress on the SDGS. That's impressive.
• 17:11
  And their strengths really span a wide range, everything from
• 17:14
  poverty around education, health, gender equality, clean
• 17:17
  water and sanitation, sustainable energy, economic
• 17:20
  growth, innovation, all the way to peace, justice, strong
• 17:25
  institutions and partnerships. It's quite a comprehensive
• 17:28
  approach to global well. Being and crucially, they
• 17:31
  actually walk the talk on development aid too.
• 17:34
  They consistently meet that UN target of providing at least .7%
• 17:39
  of gross national income in development assistance.
• 17:42
  Yes, and they've done that since 1978.
• 17:44
  That's a rare and very significant long term
• 17:47
  commitment. It really is.
• 17:48
  And you know, there's even a tangible example of Denmark's
• 17:51
  commitment right in Popenhagen, the UN city.
• 17:53
  It's like a physical manifestation of their
• 17:55
  dedication. It houses, I think 11 different
• 17:57
  UN organizations and the building itself was designed as
• 18:00
  one of Scandinavia's most sustainable buildings.
• 18:03
  So. It's not just policy on paper,
• 18:04
  it's built into their infrastructure, a real hub for
• 18:07
  global collaboration. Exactly a symbol and a practical
• 18:10
  hub. So wrapping this all up, what
• 18:13
  does this mean for you Listening in as Denmark steps on to this
• 18:17
  even larger global stage back on the Security Council pushing on
• 18:21
  climatic sense, it seems clear that a small nation can indeed
• 18:25
  have big ambitions and make a real impact.
• 18:28
  It certainly seems possible. But this deep dive, I think it
• 18:31
  also raises a pretty important, maybe provocative, question.
• 18:36
  In our world of interconnected challenges, how much can any
• 18:39
  single nation, even a proactive one like Denmark, achieve
• 18:43
  without truly transformative, unified global action?
• 18:47
  Especially when it comes down to reconciling those tricky
• 18:50
  national interests with universal goals like climate
• 18:53
  action and peace. It is the fundamental challenge,
• 18:56
  isn't it? It's a complex balance, and
• 18:58
  Denmark's role, I think, offers this fascinating case study in
• 19:01
  how a principled, proactive approach can yield influence
• 19:04
  even when facing significant global headwinds.
• 19:06
  Their ability to try and bridge devise to push for progressive
• 19:09
  agendas. It might just be a necessary
• 19:10
  model, perhaps for a more collaborative future.
• 19:13
  We'll have to see how their term unfolds.
• 19:15
  Indeed. Well, thank you for joining us
• 19:17
  on this deep dive into Denmark's really prominent role in
• 19:20
  diplomacy and international relations.
• 19:22
  My pleasure. We certainly hope you found
• 19:24
  these insights compelling. Please be sure to follow
• 19:27
  Diplomacy and International Relations by Bastian Freiburg
• 19:30
  wherever you get your deep dives.
• 19:32
  Yeah, hit that follow button. And if you enjoyed our chat
• 19:35
  today, please do leave us a five star rating and maybe a quick
• 19:38
  review. It really helps us reach more
• 19:40
  listeners who are interested in these crucial global topics.
• 19:44
  It makes a difference. Absolutely.
• 19:46
  Thanks again for listening and we'll see you next time.