Why should the UN be in the United States?

On September 26, we saw its distinctive green marble again following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's address to the UN General Assembly. Where was Netanyahu speaking from? Like any other building, the General Assembly is located somewhere specific, obviously. The complex is located on the seafront, in Turtle Bay, Manhattan, and occupies some seven hectares, including the Secretariat building (the famous 39-story tower we've seen in a thousand images), the General Assembly building, the Dag Hammarskjöld Library, and the conference building. Despite being physically within the United States, these seven hectares are not subject to US jurisdiction: they have extraterritorial legal status. The UN's own statute applies there, and the diplomats working there enjoy immunity. Then there are the headquarters in Geneva, Vienna, and Nairobi, as well as the various agencies (for example, UNESCO in Paris). In any case, it's clear that the most symbolic body of the UN is the General Assembly. It is located in the same city that gave birth to one of its worst critics: US President Donald Trump.

The UN was born in a very specific political context that had little or nothing to do with the current one. On October 24, 1945—the official date of the organization's founding—it was more or less clear to everyone that the end of the Second World War did not exactly amount to an idyllic peace, but rather a tense rebalancing of forces that would eventually become known as the Cold War. Everyone was equally clear that the undisputed hegemonic power at that time was the United States. The People's Republic of China did not yet exist (it was founded in 1949), and India was still a British colony (until August 1947), etc. The UN was born marked by these facts, which are anything but anecdotal. To see this, one need only read the Preamble and, above all, the numerous chapters related to security issues of the United Nations Charter, adopted on June 26, 1945, in San Francisco. The Charter assumes – tacitly, of course – the existence of a (pre)policy of blocs, granting it full legitimacy in such delicate points as the Security Council (Article 23.1).

The UN replaced the old League of Nations, founded in 1919, which by that time had nothing left to say, except to acknowledge its obsolescence—something undeniable—and failure—a more debatable point. It must be said that the UN was not exactly the result of a refoundation, and even less of a mere structural reform of the League of Nations. It was a new and distinct organization (in fact, the League of Nations was not officially dissolved until 1946). And now comes the question that gives the article its title, and which some may find inappropriate, or even eccentric: why, with or without extraterritorial status, should the UN General Assembly be in the United States? I anticipate entirely plausible answers: because moving it in the current context would entail an unacceptable obstacle, because it would be very difficult to reach a consensus, etc. I won't deny that this is so, but I also can't fail to offer at least two arguments to the contrary. First, the United States, which actively participated in the defeat of the German Third Reich, or Japan, which had enslaved half of Asia, no longer bears any resemblance to the country that voted massively for Donald Trump and is committed to isolationism and authoritarianism. Second, the majority (more than 70%, in fact) of the UN's actions are carried out in that undefined space formerly called the Third World and now euphemistically known as the Global South. Several agencies, such as UNICEF, UNFPA, and UN Women, They have already announced its transfer to Nairobi (Kenya) in 2026.

The UN General Assembly in the heart of Black Africa? Why not? Pay close attention, for example, to the economic potential of the so-called Silicon Savannah located there. We're talking, in short, about an emerging reality in every sense, not about our aging and fear-filled world, as this newspaper explained on Sunday. Cities mean Things. Geneva in 1919 was based on the narrative of Swiss neutrality, New York in 1945 embodied the new global hegemony, etc. Today, some well-structured cities in the Global South—be it Nairobi or another equivalent—seem like a long shot, obviously. They can still be counted on the fingers of one hand, but they already represent the future—or rather, a possible future.