Why UN Secretary General António Guterres has brought shame on his office and must resign

Only in his second week in office, the 33rd President of the United States outlined the stark choice facing humanity amidst the ravages of World War Two: “… with ever-increasing brutality and destruction, modern warfare, if unchecked, would ultimately crush all civilisation. We still have a choice between the alternatives: the continuation of international chaos – or the establishment of a world organisation for the enforcement of peace.”

Such high ideals and lofty thinking would create one of the great post-1945 institutions. After two world wars that had claimed the lives of millions, the UN was to become the guarantor of peace and cooperation among nations. It was, and remains, a fine and noble idea.

Bear-hugging a dictator

Yet today, in an age where this grand institution is needed more than ever, it struggles for legitimacy and relevance and is burdened with a stained reputation. The UN needs a level of renewal that requires it to be wholly reimagined, on a par with the vision outlined by President Truman in 1945.

Nowhere was the descent of the UN – the bedrock of the postwar consensus – adumbrated more clearly than in the Russian city of Kazan this week, where UN Secretary General António Guterres appeared far too comfortable bending the knee to Putin and bear-hugging the dictator of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko.

Guterres brought a level of shame upon his office that Lithuania’s Foreign Minister, Gabrielius Landsbergis posted on X/Twitter, “if António Guterres decides to resign, Lithuania won't try to talk him out of it”. The Secretary General should do just that.

War criminal’s international clout

Kazan hosted the 2024 BRICS summit that saw Putin welcome 20 heads of state to Russia. Among the leaders were China’s Xi Jinping, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. This year saw a whole host of nations take part for the first time, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Ethiopia.

There were two primary purposes to this summit. The first is PR, to show the world that Putin – a war criminal who has an international arrest warrant hanging over his head – has geopolitical clout. What better way to show that you’re still a global player than hosting an international summit?

The second is to build an alternative to the democratic West’s international rules-based order, with this year’s summit focused on edging-out the dollar as the dominant currency in the global payments system.

Ukraine’s anger and disbelief

While those attending the 2024 BRICS summit couldn’t be described as likeminded – good luck getting India and China or Iran and Saudi Arabia on the same page – it is nonetheless a bloc that we must pay attention to, given its ambition to influence big issues on the global economy, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and the clean energy transition.

But quite why the UN Secretary General thought his presence necessary is inexplicable. Putin almost certainly couldn’t believe his luck as the man who is supposed to symbolise the integrity of the UN Charter – a charter that Putin violates and assaults with every missile he fires at Ukrainian civilians, schools and hospitals – bowed his head and extended a hand for the world’s media, giving the Kremlin the sort of visuals they could only have dreamt of. Indeed, this is all that Guterres seems to have achieved.

It will come as no surprise that this was met with righteous anger and disbelief in Ukraine. Their anger isn’t just about Guterres allowing himself to be used in a Kremlin PR stunt – something that will doubtless be waved away as diplomatic protocol by Putin’s cheerleaders and the naive – but because this comes shortly after Guterres declined an invitation from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to attend the first global peace summit in Switzerland, held earlier this year and attended 92 nations and eight international organisations. Guterres – a man whose mandate requires him to “uphold the values and moral authority of the United Nations, and speak and act for peace” – was not one of them.

A revealing throwaway remark

I once met Guterres as part of a foreign affairs committee delegation visiting the UN headquarters in Manhattan. Although I’d never thought him a particularly impressive figure – his handling of Russia’s war on Ukraine has been pathetic from the start – it was a throwaway remark during our meeting that raised eyebrows in the room. During a discussion about domestic UK politics, the former Prime Minister of Portugal said he much preferred life in opposition, which was a revealing insight and perhaps explains much about his approach to the job he has today.

I have always cautioned against those who dismiss the UN as an expensive and pointless NGO, often wanting to see it scrapped entirely but with no thought as to what would replace it. Every day that Guterres remains in the Secretary General’s chair only emboldens those voices.

Men and women of vision

The post-war consensus has delivered an unparalleled period of peace. It hasn’t been perfect, and there are too many times where too many people have been let down by an international community that has stood by and feigned impotence.

But in this era of growing instability, anxiety and turbulence, what’s needed are great men and women who have the vision, boldness and strength to renew the international institutions, treaties and norms to be fit for a new age, just as they were in 1945.

António Guterres should step aside and make way for a Secretary General fit for the job. I’m sure he will find that a comfortable life in retirement is even better than life in Portugal’s opposition.