Interference Debate within the UN: Record of Systematic Study

This article explores the interference discourse within the United Nations. Methodologically, the article proves that public rhetoric of states is representative with regard to their perception of interference. It also introduces a novel database on interference discourse based on speeches of national representatives at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) during the high-level week from 2004 to 2023. The debate at the United Nations reflects a persistent gap in concerns regarding foreign interference between the West and the rest of the organization. Its origin dates back to the 1970s, which witnessed the rise of a coalition of developing and socialist states seeking to strengthen the sovereignty norm in international relations and Western states striving to remove the issue from international agenda. The collapse of the socialist camp strengthened positions of the West. As a result, the UNGA abandoned previous practice of regularly adopting resolutions condemning interference. Nevertheless, a number of states preserved the issue on the agenda through their rhetoric in this body. They became especially vocal in the early 2010s after the wave of political upheavals across the Middle East and North Africa which exemplified the role of external actors in fostering protest activities. Condemnation of interference at the United Nations comes primarily from the Middle Eastern and Latin American states, as well as Russia, North Korea and China. Sporadically, African governments also engage in it. Other developing states demonstrate less interest in the matter. The West remains reluctant to talk about interference. Despite attempts to manipulate the UN agenda, the organization remains instrumental for non-Western countries to condemn interventionism and undermining of state sovereignty. The use of systematic data on perceptions of interference helps identify like-minded partners interested in cooperation against this common challenge.