When Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa of Bahrain was appointed President of the sixty-first session of the UN General Assembly, she became only the third woman to occupy the prestigious post (see UN Chronicle Interview on page 10). The other two-Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit of India, who presided over the eighth session in 1953, and Angie Elisabeth Brooks of Liberia, over the twenty-fourth session in 1969-each had to chair during uncertain times for the United Nations. An examination of their pasts offers a telling portrait of how far the world Organization has gone in the last half century and how much further it has to go in promoting gender equality.

Although these two women may have come from very different backgrounds, there are striking similarities. Both came from developing countries with close ties to the English-speaking world. India was one of the first countries to gain independence from its European colonizer during the tumultuous post-Second World War period, becoming a sovereign State in 1947. Liberia, founded in 1847 by former slaves from the United States of America, was the first independent African republic. Both countries have a long history of women's empowerment.

UN photo/SOFIA PARIS

When Indira Gandhi, a niece of Mrs. Pandit, was appointed Prime Minister of India in 1965, she became one of the first Heads of Government for an Asian country, continuing the tradition of Sri Lanka's Sirimavo R. D. Bandaranaike, who became the first woman Prime Minister in 1960. Similarly, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf became the first female leader of an African nation when she won the 2005 Liberian presidential elections. Mrs. Pandit and Ms. Brooks were trailblazers in women's rights in their respective countries, laying precedent for future generations of empowered women in the civil and governmental services.

The General Assembly President, while not nearly as much of a public figure as the UN Secretary-General, occupies a significantly different leadership role. Sheikha Haya may have to preside over a transforming Assembly-one that in recent years has been increasingly vociferous in asking for a bigger say on how to reform the United Nations. After her appointment, her first and most pressing task when the sixty-first Assembly session opens in September is to help preside over the election of the next Secretary-General. Seen at times simply as a "rubber stamp" on ratifying Security Council decisions, the General Assembly has stressed recently the need to play a bigger and more active role in the UN decision-making process.

While many, including Secretary-General Kofi Annan, have applauded Sheikha Haya's appointment, hoping that she will propel forward a period of heightened visibility for women in the United Nations, one must understand the past to be able to help create a brighter future. Thus, the personal voyages of Mrs. Pandit and Ms. Brooks, two unique luminaries in UN diplomacy, is of utmost importance in comprehending the vital contribution of women to the Organization. As Eleanor Roosevelt stated in the 1946 declaration on the participation of women in the work of the United Nations-"[women must] recognize that the goal of full participation in the life and responsibilities of their countries and of the world community is a common objective"-and nowhere is that more important than in the United Nations.

Feminine Figure for Decolonization

Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, the younger sister of India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, grew up in a family steeped in politics and firmly engaged in the struggle for independence. The second UN Secretary-General, U Thant, summed up her lifelong achievements: "This civilized and worldly woman, who achieved so many 'firsts'-first woman cabinet minister, first woman ambassador, first woman to head a United Nations delegation-also became the first woman to preside the United Nations General Assembly". Prior to her work with the United Nations, Mrs. Pandit was elected in 1937 as the Minister for Health and Local-Self Government for the Indian state of Utter Pradesh. Already prominent within the Indian Congress Party, she gained global attention when she unofficially represented India in the first UN conference in 1945 in San Francisco during the waning period of the Second World War. While an official delegation from British India attended the ceremony, towing the line of its colonizer, Mrs. Pandit radically spoke up regarding the immediate independence for India in a speech to the 51 original UN Member States. "The speech was a glorious oratorical success", wrote Philip Noel-Baker, renowned British diplomat, politician and 1959 Nobel Peace laureate. "But it was much more. It convinced those delegates who had been doubtful that, if India could produce such women, India could herself most assuredly control her national affairs", he added. "A great blow was struck that morning for what President de Gaulle, a decade later, called 'the necessary decolonization of the world".1

Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit with Japanese Crown Prince Akihito and Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld in 1953 UN photo

After India gained independence, Mrs. Pandit rose quickly as a diplomat, allowing her mixture of personal charisma and astute negotiation skills to win over allies. The fact that her brother was the Prime Minister gave her an additional degree of credibility, something that she might have needed in an era where high-level female diplomats were few and far between. She served as the ambassador to what many considered then and now as the three most important political posts for India: Moscow, London, and Washington. Thus, by the time she was a senior delegate to the United Nations, Mrs. Pandit was well known and respected. She positioned herself at the forefront of both the decolonization process and the non-aligned movement. She raised attention to the inequality between the developed and developing worlds, arguing that the United Nations should be used as a bridge over the growing chasm between the two sides.

In her landmark 1945 speech in San Francisco, Mrs. Pandit underscored the socio-economic and political divide between the colonizers and the colonized, using rhetoric much akin to other decolonialists, such as Frantz Fanon. According to Horace Alexander, a British pacifist thinker, she "made it very clear that the time had come for the non-white majority to be adequately and authentically represented in the counsels of the world".1 Mrs. Pandit was not afraid to place herself firmly within the context of the North-South debate and spoke up vociferously for the rights of Third World countries. She may be best remembered for her heated debate on apartheid against Field-Marshal Jan Christian Smuts, the decorated South African war hero who was at the creation of the original League of Nations. In 1946, Mrs. Pandit led the Indian delegation in presenting to the United Nations a resolution condemning the segregationist policies of South Africa. K.P.S. Menon writes that "undaunted [by Smuts' prestige], Vijaya Lakshmi championed the Indian and Asian cause in South Africa with clarity, vigour, emotion and occasional flashes of irony". The resolution, effectively pitting whites against non-whites, passed with only one vote over the necessary two-thirds majority.

A lesser known fact about Mrs. Pandit is that prior to becoming General Assembly President, she was almost appointed Secretary-General of the United Nations. After Trygve Lie tendered his resignation in 1953, none of the proposed replacements offered by the United States, the Soviet Union and Denmark garnered the necessary number of Security Council votes. The nominations by the two superpowers were understandably contentious, as cold-war politics ensured that any candidate put forth by either of them would need to be genuinely non-aligned. As such, neither the American nor the Soviet nomination succeeded in receiving the necessary 7 out of 11 votes. The Danish nomination of Lester Pearson, who later became Canadian President and Nobel Peace Prize recipient, garnered 9 votes, but with one negative vote from a permanent Council member, he could not be appointed. It is safe to assume that the veto came from the Soviet Union.

During a 19 March 1953 meeting, "the representative of the USSR proposed the Council should recommend the appointment of Mrs. Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit". Hailing from a non-aligned country, she might have been perceived as a balancing figure between the two superpowers. However, her appointment again failed to receive the necessary number of votes, with a remarkable 8 abstentions, with 2 in favour and 1 against. This may have been due to the fact that she was a vociferous proponent of decolonization in a period when most Third World States were still colonies and did not have official representation in the United Nations. Her critical position may have alienated many Western countries, with some fearing she was too radical. Furthermore, the tacitly pro-Soviet foreign policy of Prime Minister Nehru may have estranged those countries under the American sphere of influence. Thus, Mrs. Pandit's bid to be the first female Secretary-General failed.

Mrs. Pandit's career as a diplomat wound down by the 1960s. She re-entered the world of politics, becoming the Governor of the Indian state of Maharashtra and later winning a seat in the parliamentary lower house, the Lok Sabha. Increasingly disenchanted and frustrated by the corruption of politics and what she perceived as totalitarian tendencies of Indira Gandhi, Mrs. Pandit resigned, retiring from political life. Her increasingly critical view of her niece's rule under the "emergency period", when Indira Gandhi suspended many civil liberties and incarcerated opponents of her rule, led to an internal schism within the Nehru family and the Congress Party as a whole. Nevertheless, Mrs. Pandit will be remembered, as British diplomat Malcolm Macdonald put it, for her "deep knowledge of international affairs, her remarkably wide diplomatic experience and her fine mature wisdom, which, combined with her personal grace, made her an outstanding ambassador". Her last major post was as India's representative to the UN Human Rights Commission. Former United States President Harry Truman, on the eve of her 70th birthday, summarized much of the world's opinion on the charismatic diplomat: "Madam Pandit served with effectiveness and distinction the interest of not only her own nation but the world community as well." She passed away on 1 December 1990.

Empowering African Women

The world had to wait for 15 years for another woman to be appointed President of the General Assembly. Angie E. Brooks' tenure with the United Nations was the culmination of a lifetime of hardship and hard work. Unlike Mrs. Pandit, who was born with a silver spoon in her mouth, Ms. Brooks was one of nine children of a "back-country minister of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church". She grew up in a foster home as her parents were too poor to support her. After studying law through a tutor, she was admitted to Shaw University in North Carolina. Unable to pay for travelling expenses, she showcased the beginnings of her lifelong tenacity by personally entreating the President of Liberia for funding. "In Liberia, the President's office is open to all … I kept plaguing [President William V. S. Tubman]. I heard he likes to walk at six [a.m.], so early one morning I went to see him."2 Her repeated requests finally paid off and she received the necessary funds to study in the United States.

Angie Elisabeth Brooks, as Liberia's representative in 1955, with S.M. Khan of Pakistan and Ishar Harari of Israel UN photo

After working with the Justice Department of Liberia, Ms. Brooks was appointed in the delegation to the United Nations in 1954, just as Mrs. Pandit's tenure was ending. She continued serving for the next two decades, culminating in her own appointment as the twenty-fourth General Assembly President in 1969. Mrs. Brooks had an illustrious career with the United Nations. In 1956, she served as Vice-Chairman of the Assembly's Fourth Committee, which monitored the state of colonial and non-self-governing territories. Six years later, she became Chairman of the United Nations Commission for Rwanda-Burundi, followed in 1964 with a chairmanship in the UN visiting mission to the pre-independent Pacific Islands. In 1965, she was Vice-President, and the following year President, of the Trusteeship Council-the UN watchdog over its trust territories. She was the first woman and the first African to serve in this capacity.

In her opening speech as Assembly President, Ms. Brooks did not spare the Organization her criticism: "The UN … has suffered a decline in prestige in recent years because of its lack of dynamism. Our weakness … seems to lie in the fact that we all too often view world affairs somewhat parochially, as if they were being played out at the Headquarters on the East River of New York. We have sometimes failed to realize that neither oratory nor agreements between delegates, nor even resolutions or recommendations, have had much impact on the course of affairs in the world at large." Mrs. Brooks' legacy lay in her "mixture of feminine charm and shrewd diplomacy".2 She was adept at getting her point across without much diplomatic sidestepping and was not averse giving her fellow delegates a "straightforward" and "motherly" scolding. After representing her country in the United Nations, she served as a Justice on Liberia's Supreme Court.

What the Future Holds

Why has the gap widened between the appointments of female General Assembly presidents? After all, it seems incongruous that as more countries open up their electoral systems to women voters the United Nations continues to have very few women in its most august posts. We must realize that the Assembly, much as all the other UN committees and councils, is comprised of representatives from Member States and not from the UN bureaucracy. Therefore, the responsibility of electing officials in the General Assembly resides with national governments, as only their representatives decide whom to elect as president.

According to Sydney Dawson Bailey, both unofficial rules and official decrees are important in the selection process for General Assembly president.3 "The chief criterion to be borne in mind in the selection of officers should be personal competence", but "the more heterogeneous the membership of an assembly, the more the criterion of personal competence in the selection of officers tends to give way to some system of rotation or equitable distribution". As the Assembly is undoubtedly the most diverse and all-encompassing body in the UN system, this notion of regional representation is particularly important. Mr. Bailey writes that "the presidency has rotated from region to region with reasonable equity … representatives of all geographical areas, except Eastern Europe, had several times held in turn the office of President". Similar to the de facto tradition of regional rotation of the Assembly presidency, there is a general consensus that there should be no candidate for the seat from any of the five Security Council permanent members-this has continued to this day.

A surprising aspect that must not be overlooked of the selection process is the fact that no candidate is officially nominated by a country and there is no official campaigning. Every country has an anonymous vote that they can cast. Regional precedent, coupled with the lack of official campaigns, means that the people running for the presidency seek to garner votes in the unofficial backrooms and private conference halls of the United Nations. And in order for a country to push for its representative to be put into contention, its delegation has to convince its allies to vote for its candidate. The rotation system allows for candidates, who aim first and foremost to consolidate their region's support, to come from only a specific region every year. As Mr. Bailey notes, the movement away from direct elections "did not, of course, get rid of the nominating process: it transferred it from the floor of the Assembly to the corridors. Moreover, it has been impossible to avoid nominations in disguise".

So how in this exceedingly complex process have women been left largely out of the equation? As the Assembly presidency comes to each region every five years or so, it may be the case that very few delegations have been willing to go out on a limb and nominate a woman. As competition is fierce within each region, campaigning for any individual that may raise controversy is unadvisable. Thus, women within the General Assembly, already at a disadvantage as very few female diplomats were part of the original UN delegations, have been stuck in a quagmire in which their representation within the United Nations has remained consistently low. Both developing and developed nations have continued nominating mostly male diplomats for the very important posts, unwilling to break out of the status quo and jeopardize the chances of having its candidates elected.

The United Nations stands at the crossroads of gender equality. As the responsibility of electing women rests mainly on Member States, and not on the UN bureaucracy itself, change will occur only when there is a consensus to bring reform. One must hope that with Sheikha Haya's approaching term, a heightened visibility for women in the United Nations will occur, continuing well past the end of her tenure. As Ms. Brooks stated in her closing speech as Assembly President, "if much remains to be done, new avenues to be explored, new attitudes and ideas to be found, we have given the direction to future assemblies". Let us hope that Sheikha Haya's tenure can set a precedent for future assemblies and that the world will not have to wait for another 37 years for another woman President of the General Assembly.

Notes

1 Mehta, Chandralekha et al. Sunlight Surround You. New Delhi: Orient Longmans, 1970.

2 Crane, Louise. Ms. Africa: Profiles of Modern African Women. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1973.

3 Bailey, Sydney Dawson. The General Assembly of the United Nations: A Study of Procedure and Practice. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1978, c.1964.