The two speakers are the co-founders of the Washington based Institute for State Effectiveness [Ashraf Ghani as Chair, and Clare Lockhart as Director], after, as they say themselves, having learned from experience what worked and what did not work in Afghanistan, and they codified that information and released it in a book form in the Oxford Press recently published volume - tiled appropriately: ” FIXING FAILED STATES.”

As we posted above the speakers profiles, it is obvious that we were interested in this presentation as Dr. Ashraf Ghani was one of the candidates in 2006 for the post of UN Secretary General, later his name was also put forward for the post of President of the World Bank. Without any detractors, Dr. Ghani was perhaps the only bright light in the Afghanistan saga - he fixed the starting economy as first Finance Minister and then the University as first Chancellor in the new Afghanistan. With those credentials he was a late entree for the UN Secretariat stakes - but the sum-total of the P-5 found Mr. Ban Ki-moon more malleable to their will - so Dr. Ghani was left in the cold.

The following is from our article:   http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2006/10…

On January 1st 2007, there should be a new UN Secretary-General. This position is extremely important as during the time of service of this new Secretary-General the future of the organization will have to be decided. Simply said, what was designed over sixty years ago by the small group of the alliance that believed it won in WWII does not represent the realities of today - neither in the real world nor in the Turtle Bay’s present 192 members’ club. We followed the process of selecting the new Secretary-General closely - inside and outside the UN.

Our last article on the subject, dated October 3, 2006, was titled New UN Secretary-General; Will He Be The Last Secretary-General?

On April 19, 2006, the Financial Times printed an article by our friend at the UN, the FT corespondent Mark Turner, in which he pointed out not the known unrest of developing-country delegations, the mainly post 1946 UN Members, but actually Canada and Sweden find also the selection system to be anachronistic, secretive, and we may add even conspiratorial.
The UN General Assembly wants to become more involved in the selection process, rather then continue to be called upon only as a rubber stamp to OK what was agreed by mainly the five permanent members of the Security Council.

Above gives us by the way an example of the intensity with which some countries pursue their goals to ascend to the 38th floor in the UN building and it makes it imperative to have more transparency if the process. In this respect the Asia Society Headquarters in New York City should be praised for entering this breach. As it seems that indeed it will be an Asian to head the UN - possibly for the next very important years, the Asia Society has made itself home to some of the contenders and we had the possibility to listen to three of the candidates: to Mr. Sashi Taroor, to Mr. Ban Ki Moon, and to Mr. Ashraf Ghani, former Finance Minister of Afghanistan and presently head of the University of Kabul. From having listened to above three we are in the position to remark that while Sashi Tharoor and Ashraf Ghani were ready to volunteer visions of the future and came through as campaigners hoping to explain where they will want to lead the organization.

Mr. Ashraf Ghani, the real outsider and latecomer to the process, was eager to show that he is thankful for this opportunity to bring his ideas and himself before an audience. He did not come from no-where. As an official at the World Bank he dealt with many countries and I learned that in effect China and Russia should be thankful to him for having helped them in their needs as he did to many developing countries. He was very well received by the Asia Society audience, and though we had the feeling that the job may have already been taken, nevertheless everybody in the room is rooting that his talents be used by next UN administration in some form.

From the World Bank he went back to Afghanistan to help build his country, he made it clear that education should be the highest priority of the developing countries in order to help them enter the small leading group of developed countries. Without a strong education system he said, that while advancing economically, developing countries fall in effect back compared to countries of higher educational standing and the gasp for the majority of their people widens. That is why he spends his time now building the University, interestingly he said that he sends students rather to universities in the south, and binds them to contracts such as having to return one year service to the country for each year they studies. He wants to make sure they indeed come back and help their country. I had the feeling that he could have been an excellent UNSG for those interested in Sustainable Development.

Sashi Tharoor is a very good blend of insider-outsider, though clearly a UN insider he nevertheless could take the UN achievements and build on them when trying to improve the organization. He does know the problems and needs of Sustainable Development and the fact that establishing this way of thinking is an imperative for sanity and the long term future of the world. He also would have been a good choice for UNSG and he was the preferred choice of SustainabiliTank.info                             The  Photos of Sashi Tarror and Ashraf Ghani were taken by Pincas Jawetz at the Asia Society in New York City.

Also, when Dr. Ashraf Ghani ran for President of the World Bank we had the following posting: http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2007/05…

That was a nasty posting as it included an International Herald Tribune Cartoon, but it had some nice words about Dr, Ghani in the posting: “Looking for Paul Wolfowitz replacement, the papers mention among the candidates Dr. Ashraf Ghani, a former World Bank official who is an Afghan who holds also the US citizenship - something that seems to be an unwritten precondition.. He is now with the University of Kabul. He was one of the candidates for UN Secretary-General and we listened to him at the Asia Society in New York. He sounded well informed on issues of Sustainable Development, and not being a front runner for the position of UNSG he was quite outspoken.”

OK, with above memories, I watched the two presentations tonight and the questions from Tom Freston who chaired tonight’s event for the Asia Society. They were talking about the need for serious investment in infrastructure and called the failure as a sign that it can be done better and it is thus repairable. There was talk about the need for a “human contract.” Here Dr. Ghani was clear in his element by pointing out that despite the huge amount of money that kept pouring out for aid programs, not a single donor gave anything for education. AHA! Infrastructure is basically the youth. start with them and help them build a better future. Do not micro-manage. Make only two decisions a month and stick to them - be long vision.

Countries are not inherently poor - the success or failure of a State can be judged whether they invest in their young - offer them a pass of inclusion where they can lift themselves by their work.

BY ABOVE CRITERION “DO NO HARM” - AID FAILED THE COUNTRY. 65% of the aid money is lost in the “administration” of the aid - this includes the rule of shipping food in US ships that are several times more expensive then other ships.

Microcredit gave women of Asia - even when they were not “bankable” means for credit. It helped - but now they have to worry about food - this is a new setback. Aid was a promise that did not deliver - you hear this all over. In Afghanistan, with 65% of the people under 20 - born without having had first hand experience and now memories from the Soviet time, there will be an upheaval. They feel they did not get what was promised and that is true. This is in a country with five levels of government from the village to the country-wide.

Now, being on top of a successful State takes decisions. In global context, with 6 States in the Gulf earning today the same amount of money daily that the US is borrowing daily - this is unsustainable.

About the NGOs: They are agents that transfer money - he prefers government to government direct funding with the receiving countries adding their own funds. He wants to see private enterprise involvement from both sides. National solidarity has to be designed top-to-bottom — it never was done bottom-up! The people have to get part of the decision - yes. Sweden is a completely centralized system.

We tried to hear some more that would give us a feel what he would have done were he UNSG. So I asked what would he suggest the UN do about Africa, and what should the WB do about Africa - mentioning by name: Sudan, Somalia, Congo, Zimbabwe and Cote d’Ivoire. This might not have been the best way to phrase my question because it allowed the two speakers to focus only on Sudan, a country where they had direct experience as they did consulting there.

What I was able to get out from my notes, nevertheless, was that One has to work with the government so the government is providing the Global Public Goods (GPG) to their people. Sudan, when they worked there was getting $10,000 in aid - now they make $250 million in oil/months. He tells the UN and the WB not to do projects that they do not know how to manage - and thus they fail. Let the public enterprise do it under supervision s by making clear the tasks.

So, the TOP SHOULD DO ONLY A FEW DECISIONS AND STICK TO THEM. IF YOU TAKE 10 DECISIONS/DAY YOU ACHIEVE NOTHING.

So, I GOT MY ANSWER ABOUT THE UN AND THE WB. TOO MUCH TALK AND NO RESULTS - THAT IS NATURAL.

After the meeting I spoke with Dr. Ghani that I would like to get a longer interview with him in order to hear really how the UN management could be done better - he said why not and I hope sometime later this summer to be able to report on what we missed by not having him in New York.