This past week, the UN voted on a resolution that officially named the Transatlantic Slave Trade the “Gravest crime against humanity” and called for reparations. On a surface level, this resolution appears to be a simple clean sweep, but it was not. 52 nations abstained while three voted against it. Of those who abstained and voted against it, a similar reason emerged: we shouldn’t put hierarchies on crimes against humanity.
Using the word “gravest” implied that there was a hierarchy on crimes against humanity. This wording can diminish other injustices that are of a different nature, which is unprofessional, problematic and downright unethical. We as humans should not decide what crime falls into what category because that can breed impunity and denial, and when those ideas take hold, they are hard to uproot. With impunity, those who have committed crimes are able to walk free with almost no legal ramifications. They can also feel enabled to continue committing crimes because they were not held responsible for past actions. With denial, those people who hold ideas of denial can downplay or spread falsehoods. With a hierarchy they can avoid the top crimes but can easily pick off those seen as less in international eyes. When ideas of denial and impunity grow, those who hold those beliefs feel empowered by the lack of push back. This empowerment can grow when crimes become a hierarchy.
Though it should be noted, we should not swing the pendulum too far for the same reason, because on the opposite end, ideas of apathy run rampant on the opposite end. Equally, brushing crimes under the rug with statements such as “it was so long ago” and “everyone who experienced it is now dead” should also be crushed. When it comes to resolutions like these, we must find the middle ground that does not diminish the crime itself nor compares it to other crimes.
The UN should rewrite the resolution to clearly state that, yes, the Transatlantic Slave trade was a grave crime against humanity, but should stop short of calling it the gravest. No professional legislative action should ever hold the word gravest in regard to crimes. They should also clearly define who is the receiver of the reparations. A resolution from an International Body should be clear and precise. It should avoid generalizing or blanket statements. This is not a resolution for the UN but a resolution for humanity. Humanity as a whole should understand the horrors of the Transatlantic Slave Trade, but an international body should not deem any crime as gravest or above the rest.
The problem with reparations is that it should not go to a country’s government, but to the people whose families were impacted by the Transatlantic Slave Trade. A government should not receive money based on the loose historical connection to the people who were actually impacted. To pay money to a government and not the people is purely a slap in the face towards those seeking justice and retribution for their ancestors. No matter who is paying the money, it should be delivered only to those whose ancestors were impacted.
The UN needs to set up channels and resources not for governments but for the everyday person. Governments need to be hands-off in regard to reparations. The UN should first begin to look inward at their own practices and how they would handle distributing real payment before advancing actual discussions of monetary transactions between international parties. If they don’t fix their practices, resolutions like these end up just being for pomp and circumstance and for international parties to pat themselves on the back. It makes the UN look like a stage for performers rather than a serious international union focused on making the world a better place for everyone.
When it comes to resolutions, it’s better to admit faults within the language and fix it rather than point fingers and take sides. The UN should be for the eight billion people who call Earth their home, not for the 193 ambassadors. If they cannot see the error of their ways, then maybe the UN is closer to becoming like the League of Nations: obsolete.