Israel’s unprecedented declaration of UN Secretary-General António Guterres as persona non grata has challenged the very foundations of global diplomacy
The United Nations was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell. These words from Dag Hammarskjöld, the second Secretary-General of the United Nations (UN), resonate with renewed urgency today. As the world observes United Nations Day on October 24, the occasion is marked by an unprecedented diplomatic crisis that raises critical questions about the future of global cooperation. Israel’s recent declaration of current UN Secretary-General António Guterres as persona non grata has sent shockwaves through international diplomacy, challenging the very principles the UN was founded to uphold.
The persona non grata designation, meaning a foreign official is no longer welcome, effectively bars Guterres from entering Israeli territory.
This decision stems from his comments about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, which were meant to emphasise the need for aid and peace. However, many Israeli officials viewed his remarks as biased against Israel, sparking tensions that led to this extraordinary response. As the world pauses to honour the UN’s efforts in fostering peace and multilateral dialogue, this incident serves as a stark reminder of the difficulties faced by diplomacy in an increasingly polarised world. Established in 1945 following the devastation of World War II, the UN was created to maintain peace, promote human rights, and foster global cooperation. United Nations Day is intended to celebrate these ideals and the achievements of the world’s largest international organisation. Yet, as we commemorate the UN’s 79th anniversary, Israel’s declaration of Guterres as persona non grata stands in sharp contrast to the spirit of multilateralism. The move not only represents a significant rebuke of Guterres’ leadership but also challenges the UN’s ability to act as an impartial mediator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one of the world’s longest-standing disputes.
The UN has often faced criticism for its perceived bias or ineffectiveness, especially in conflict zones. Israel’s frustrations with the organisation are longstanding, rooted in concerns about what it perceives as an undue focus on its policies while other nations escape similar scrutiny. The exclusion of Guterres from Israel, however, marks a dramatic escalation in this discontent. It signals a rejection not just of the Secretary-General’s leadership but of the UN’s role in mediating peace, setting a troubling precedent for the organisation’s future involvement in the region. The concept of persona non grata has been wielded as a powerful diplomatic tool throughout history. Declaring someone unwelcome goes beyond a personal rebuke; it conveys a nation’s stance on international relations. Past examples include the expulsion of Russian diplomats from various European countries amid political tensions, or Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez being declared persona non grata by Colombia. However, Israel’s designation of the UN’s top diplomat is an extraordinary and rare occurrence, symbolising a low point in the relationship between Israel and the international community.
For Israel, Guterres’ remarks on the Gaza crisis were viewed as an affront to its right to self-defense, adding to long-standing grievances over perceived bias at international forums. Israeli officials, including the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, quickly accused Guterres of undermining their security by portraying Israel’s military actions as disproportionate.
This stance reflects broader frustrations with international organisations, which some Israelis feel have not adequately acknowledged the complexities of their national security concerns.
While the declaration is a decision made by Israel, its implications extend far beyond its borders. Human rights organisations and diplomatic circles have reacted swiftly to the move. Amnesty International, for instance, condemned the decision, arguing that it undermines the principles of diplomacy and the UN’s mission to foster dialogue. Critics assert that Guterres, in his capacity as Secretary-General, was fulfilling his duty by highlighting the humanitarian situation in Gaza, and his exclusion from Israel sets a dangerous precedent.
This incident highlights a growing trend of nations rejecting external criticism, even when it comes from humanitarian or impartial voices. The result could be a world where diplomacy no longer seeks common ground but instead shuts out dissent. The exclusion of Guterres reflects not only a national stance but a broader global trend of rising nationalism and isolationism.
Across the world, countries are increasingly resistant to international oversight or critique, a shift that threatens the very role of the UN as a mediator and peacekeeper. As we observe UN Day, the importance of this moment cannot be overstated. The UN’s mission to save humanity from conflict, as Hammarskjöld envisioned, is more critical than ever.
The exclusion of Guterres exposes a fragile global order where the organisation’s ability to mediate and foster peace is increasingly questioned. Israel’s actions are not only a national response to perceived bias but also resonate with broader concerns about the fairness and effectiveness of international institutions in addressing security issues. Despite these challenges, the current diplomatic crisis could serve as a turning point for global diplomacy.
As we mark United Nations Day, Guterres’ designation as persona non grata by Israel is a stark reminder of the challenges facing diplomacy today.
Yet, in the midst of this crisis lies an opportunity. This mission remains as vital now as it was when the UN was founded nearly eight decades ago.
(The writer is an associate professor; views are personal)
