Submit your comments on this article |
International-UN-NGOs |
Annan unveils sweeping UN reforms |
2005-03-21 |
![]() "This is a deal that the secretary general is offering the world," Annan's chief-of-staff Mark Malloch Brown said at UN headquarters in New York. "It's not an a la carte package. We believe the whole thing has to hold together." World leaders will hold a summit here in September, by which time Mr Annan is hoping most of the changes including those contentious issues that have defied agreement for years will be hammered out. "If it doesn't come to a head by that (summit), the fear is that it just drifts into another period without a deadline," Mr Malloch Brown said. The main changes would have to be agreed by two thirds of the UN's 191-member nations as well as by the five veto-wielding permanent Security Council members Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. It remains unclear how much political will exists for substantive change. But Mr Malloch Brown said momentum had been growing for sweeping reforms. "I think there is a huge support for the idea that it's time for a bold and practical deal of this kind," he said. Mr Annan put forward two options for expanding Security Council membership from the present 15 to 24 nations one of which would add new permanent members and called for the creation of a peace-building commission. He also issued a call for a new human rights council to be elected by member states as part of an overall bid to stress that development, health and rights are essential factors in the freedom and security of peoples and nations. "Even if he can vote to choose his rulers, a young man with AIDS who cannot read or write and lives on the brink of starvation is not truly free," Mr Annan writes in the report's introduction. "Equally, even if she earns enough to live, a woman who lives in the shadow of daily violence and has not say in how her country is run is not truly free." Though in the works for more than a year, the report comes with the UN buffeted by a series of high-profile scandals that has focused the spotlight on itsmismanagement. It also comes with Security Council nations at a deadlock over tackling the crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan, where UN officials say as many as 180,000 people have died in fighting between the Sudanese government and rebels. |
Posted by:God Save The World |
#7 Hey Fred you gotter a picture of DeSoto overlooking the Mississippi? |
Posted by: Shipman 2005-03-21 1:16:03 PM |
#6 I don't see what the big deal is. I've never been to the UN, but are the floors that dirty? Do they really need to reform their sweeping that badly? Certainly, there will be no attempt to fix the core problems of the UN. For a start, the UN delegate must be elected in an honest, unrestricted, multi-party, election, or appointed by a government that was elected thusly. No more appointees of Castro or the Mad Mullahs. There are many other serious structural problems, but there's really no point in doing anything else unless that is fixed. "Accountability" means nothing when you are "accountable" to thieves and murderers. |
Posted by: Jackal 2005-03-21 12:45:07 PM |
#5 If the first reform was mass seppuku for all UN Management, I'd be rather enthusiastic about reading the rest. |
Posted by: .com 2005-03-21 12:32:53 PM |
#4 We Koffi I, by the grace of Allah and the Goddess suplreme leader of Humankind, do proclaim... |
Posted by: gromgorru 2005-03-21 10:25:40 AM |
#3 I propose a new name. The League of Nations. |
Posted by: tu3031 2005-03-21 8:33:26 AM |
#2 "...establish a new human rights council and commit to ambitious goals on development..." Translation: more bureaucracy and his hand deeper in your pocket. |
Posted by: Tom 2005-03-21 8:05:15 AM |
#1 More blathering from one of my favorite anti-American morons trying to save his Tranzi dream. The only changes that would be worth considering are a promise to stay out of US sovereign affairs and foreign policy. Of course a reduction of the percentage of the UN budget the US pays from around 1/4 to 1/191 as is fair in my view, and move it to Brussels of course. Anything less than that is window dressing. The UN ultimately needs to be dissovled, period. Many RBer's have given much more eloquent arguements than I could hope to put together for the reasons why - but they should be apparent to even the most mildy alert Americans that the UN is nothing but no good. My sense that the UN is capable of acting correctly was never established so I don't need to worry about it being restored. I would like to see them fall on their sword though with a wave of arrests and lengthy jail terms for those involved in the oil for food embbezzlement, and I'm talking EVERYONE. But we all know Kofi will never man up. |
Posted by: JerseyMike 2005-03-21 7:37:41 AM |