links about us archives search home
SustainabiliTankSustainabilitank menu graphic
SustainabiliTank
Languages:
English flagItalian flagGerman flagSpanish flagFrench flagPortuguese flagJapanese flagKorean flagChinese flagArabic flagRussian flag

Reporting from the UN Headquarters in New YorkReporting from Washington DCReporting from UNFCCC Meetings
Other UN CitiesThe US StatesThe New Climate
Global Warming issuesPolicy Lessons from Mad Cow DiseaseUN Commission on Sustainable Development

 
Niger:

 

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 26th, 2008
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

EYE ON THE UN: For Immediate Release - May 26, 2008 - The US Memorial Day.

Contact: Anne Bayefsky
(917) 488-1558
 anne at hudsonny.org

UN Racism Conference to be held in Geneva April 20-24, 2009 - Ironically over Holocaust Remembrance Day.

May 26, 2008

The next UN racism conference - known as Durban II or the Durban Review Conference - will be held on UN premises in Geneva from April 20-24, 2009, a UN preparatory committee decided today.

Anne Bayefsky, editor of EYEontheUN.org, said “holding the meeting at a UN venue on European soil will essentially guarantee funding from the UN regular budget for the conference, and that the European Union will fully participate and not follow boycott plans of Canada, the United States and Israel.”

The European Union had been insisting on a shorter session in New York, but the African Group refused to agree on the New York venue and wanted a 5-day conference. The idea floated by some states of again holding the conference in Durban, South Africa fell through when South Africa withdrew its offer to host the event. Throughout negotiations the African group was tightly controlled by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, with Egypt acting as their spokesperson.

Bayefsky noted “Ironically, the Durban Review Conference will take place over Holocaust Remembrance Day, Yom HaShoah on April 21, 2009.

Jews all over the world will be remembering the 6 million murdered in the worst instance of racism and xenophobia in human history.

At the same time, the United Nations will be discussing whether the Jewish state, created in the wake of the Holocaust and standing as a bulwark to ensure it is never repeated, should be demonized as the worst practitioner of racism and xenophobia among nations today.”

Durban II is intended to promote the implementation of the 2001 Durban Declaration, which singled out only Israel and labeled Palestinians as victims of Israeli racism.

————-

For once South Africa showed the courage to stand up and be counted among the Nations - the rest of Africa - we must note - is nothing but a rug at the feet of the Islamic world - Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibuti, Kenya, Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Marocco … all countries were black Africans suffer from the Egyptian led OIC intrusions on their continent. The UN is just a conduit for making the world pay the bill.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 29th, 2008
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Let Us Look Closely At Some Of The UN DAILY NEWS from the UNITED NATIONS NEWS SERVICE
28 April, 2008 =========================================================================
Analyzing the news we find that now even the UN makes clear prediction that climate change in Africa is bound to become a security problem with the Sahel countries of Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal among the first that must address this inevitable danger. All these countries belong to the Arabized Africa.

But Mr. Ziegler of the UN “Right to Food” Program just shoots his mouth at the US and at the EU for trying to decrease their dependence on imported oil by emulating the great Brazilian experience with biofuels. Rather then being helpful, Mr. Ziegler calls for a moratorium that could only benefit his Arab friends.

Mr. Ban Ki-moon visits now the economic offices of the UN in Vienna and Geneva, and speaks up about the real World needs. He will then meet high level UN officials from Economic and Human Rights offices. He will also meet the foreign ministers of Austria and Slovenia, and the President of Switzerland. Our main attention is drawn to this last meeting and we think that the best reason for his trip could come true if he were to negotiate with the Swiss President’s removing Mr. Ziegler from his UN related functions, as he did enough damage by now. Also, perhaps, if needed, Switzerland could take over from South Africa the hosting of that Durban II event. By bringing the hotheads of that planned disaster to their senses, Switzerland could have the chance to redeem itself from all these other problems that its citizen, Ziegler, managed to create on the world stage. We really do not want to see that the Swiss flag will remain stained for any further length of time.

Further, While in Vienna, in his meetings there, Mr. Ban could obtain further information about farm policy and biofuels. The Austrians were very good at that. When “Gemma Brott Verbrennen” was the anti-ethanol call that was all over the frontpage of the daily “Kurrier” - the Austrians moved to the production of biodiesel made from oil of the ricinus plant in order to avoid the Food-for-fuel misrepresentation of the European agriculture. The Slovenians think in this respect like the Austrians.

UN TO ASSIST AFRICAN FARMERS THREATENED BY CLIMATE CHANGE

Some 10,000 farmers in five African countries, where crops are expected to be badly affected by climate change, are to receive help from the United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in the form of low-cost rain gauge equipment and roving seminars provided by agricultural experts.

With the help of Spain, WMO will distribute the rain gauges to volunteer farmers in Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal, and train them in using rainfall data to plan sowing, fertilizer application and harvesting.

The goal of the roving seminars is to support farmers’ self-reliance by supplying them with information on weather and climate risk management.

In West Africa, the area suitable for agriculture, the length of the growing season, and crop yields, especially along the margins of arid and semi-arid areas, are all expected to decrease, according to projections by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In some African countries, yield from rain-fed farming could be reduced by up to 50 per cent by 2020.

The assistance plan was announced on Friday after a meeting in Niamey, Niger, which was organized by WMO and the State Meteorological Agency of Spain.

* * *

BIOFUEL PRODUCTION IS ‘CRIMINAL PATH’ LEADING TO GLOBAL FOOD CRISIS – UN EXPERT

The United States and the European Union have taken a “criminal path” by contributing to an explosive rise in global food prices through using food crops to produce biofuels, according to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to food.

Speaking at a press conference today in Geneva, Jean Ziegler said that fuel policies pursued by the US and the EU were one of the main causes of the current worldwide food crisis. Mr. Ziegler said that last year the US used a third of its corn crop to create biofuels, while the European Union is planning to have 10 per cent of its petrol supplied by biofuels. The Special Rapporteur has called for a five-year moratorium on the production of biofuels.

Mr. Ziegler also said that speculation on international markets was behind 30 per cent of the increase in food prices. He said that companies such as Cargill, which controls a quarter of all cereal production, have enormous power over the market. He added that hedge funds are also making huge profits from raw materials markets, and called for new financial regulations to prevent such speculation.

The Special Rapporteur warned of worsening food riots and a “horrifying” increase in deaths by starvation before reforms could take effect. Mr. Ziegler was speaking before a meeting today in Bern, Switzerland, between Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the heads of key UN agencies.

Meanwhile, speaking in Rome today, a nutritionist with the UN World Food Programme (WFP), said that “global price rises mean that food is literally being taken out of the mouths of hungry children whose parents can no longer afford to feed them.”

Andrew Thorne-Lyman said that even temporarily depriving children of the nutrients they need to grow and thrive can leave permanent scars in terms of stunting their physical growth and intellectual potential. He said that families in the developing world are “finding their buying power has been slashed by food price rises, meaning that they can buy less food or food which isn’t as nutritious.”

* * *

SECRETARY-GENERAL BAN CHAIRS MEETING OF TOP OFFICIALS FROM ACROSS THE UN

The current global food crisis triggered by soaring prices, the safety and security of United Nations personnel and climate change dominated talks today involving Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and other senior officials from the world body.

The topics were discussed at the spring session of the Chief Executives Board, which brings together the heads of the world body’s various entities for regular meetings, in Bern, the Swiss capital, where Mr. Ban is on an official visit.

At a panel in Vienna last Friday, the Secretary-General stressed the urgency of tackling the food issue, noting that it is “very closely interlinked with development issues, climate change, food prices, our fight against disease and other equally important areas.”

He noted that the food crisis has hurt the world’s poorest and pushed 100 million people further into poverty, impeding the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), eight targets to slash a host of social ills by 2015.

“This has been a global challenge, so we need to address it in a collective way – globally,” Mr. Ban said in his remarks to a forum entitled “The United Nations and the European Union: Joining Forces for the Challenges of the 21st Century.”

Also participating in the events were Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik of Austria and Dimitrij Rupel, Foreign Minister of Slovenia, which currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency.

Speaking to reporters in Vienna, the Secretary-General said that as a short-run response to the food crises, all humanitarian crises must be addressed.

“In the longer term, the international community, particularly the leaders of the international community, should sit down together on an urgent basis and address how we can, first of all, improve these economic systems, distributions systems, as well as how we can promote the improved production of agricultural products,” he added.

Later today, Mr. Ban is scheduled to meet with Pascal Couchepin, the President of Switzerland.

* * *

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 25th, 2008
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

We wondered that the only material in Arabic that we found on the tables at the Session on Climate Change - the 7th Session of The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues - was from Israel.

Now we found two Tuaregue delegates who gave us material in French dealing with incidents of August 26th, 2007 at Gougaram, Niger; November 23rd, 2007, Tchintabizguine, Niger; and April 10th, 2008, Kidal , Mali - where Tuaregs were killed by the more Arabized Niger and Mali authorities. This is an issue of human rights raised by the tribes that are closer to the original inhabitants - the indigenous  people - in those two African States.

Will their problem be looked at before it reaches Darfurian dimensions?

tuaregs002.gif

tuaregs003.gif

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 11th, 2008

Declining Support for Tough Measures against Iran’s Nuclear Program: Global Poll by BBC for www.worldpublicopinion.org

 http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/a…

March 11, 2008

bbciran_mar08_img.jpg

Support for tough measures against Iran’s nuclear program has fallen in 13 out of 21 countries according to a new BBC World Service Poll.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks at Columbia University in New York on September 24, 2007 (Photo: Daniella Zalcman)

Compared to results from a June 2006 BBC World Service Poll, support for economic sanctions or military strikes has declined significantly, including in countries that were previously among the highest supporters of tough action.

Support for these measures has dropped 10 points in Australia (52 per cent to 42 per cent), nine points in Britain (43 per cent to 34 per cent), nine points in Germany (46 per cent to 37 per cent), seven points in Canada (52 per cent to 45 per cent), six points in the United States (66 per cent to 60 per cent) and 30 points in Mexico (46 per cent to 16 per cent).

Only three countries show an increase in support for economic sanctions or military strikes: an increase of nine points among Israelis (62 per cent to 71 per cent), six points among South Koreans (47 per cent to 53 per cent), and 12 points among Turkish respondents (21 per cent to 33 per cent).

Most interviews were conducted following the release of the US National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iran had stopped pursuing nuclear weapons in 2003.

Across all 31 countries surveyed in the latest poll (the 21 tracking countries plus an additional 10 countries polled for the first time), most respondents oppose the use of economic sanctions or military strikes.

Respondents were presented four options that the UN Security Council could use to address the fact that Iran continues to produce nuclear fuel in defiance of the UN Security Council resolution. The options of economic sanctions or military strikes were rejected in 27 out of 31 countries. Instead, the most preferred approaches are to either use only diplomatic efforts or not pressure Iran at all.

On average 57 per cent favor diplomacy (43 per cent) or no pressure on Iran (14 per cent). Just one-in-three favor economic sanctions (26 per cent) or military strikes (8 per cent).

bbciran_mar08_graph1.jpg

The poll also found that there are conditions under which many people would be willing to accept Iran having a limited capacity to produce nuclear fuel. The question asked: “If Iran were to allow UN inspectors permanent and full access throughout Iran, to make sure it is not developing nuclear weapons, do you think Iran should or should not be allowed to produce nuclear fuel for producing electricity?”

In 17 of the 31 countries more people favor than oppose the idea, while in 10 countries more are opposed and four countries are divided. Support is fairly strong in some of the countries in the forefront of the drive to stop Iran’s nuclear program, including the US (55 per cent), Britain (71 per cent) and France (56 per cent). On average 47 per cent are in favor while 36 per cent are opposed.

The results are drawn from a survey of 32,039 adult citizens across 31 countries conducted for the BBC World Service by the international polling firm GlobeScan together with the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland. GlobeScan coordinated fieldwork between October 31, 2007 and January 25, 2008.

Steven Kull, Director of PIPA comments, “It appears that people in many countries are interested in ramping down the confrontation with Iran, while still using UN inspectors to ensure that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.”

Detailed Findings

In three countries a majority today favors economic sanctions or military strikes to deal with Iran. These include Israel (sanctions 37 per cent, strikes 34 per cent), the United States (sanctions 45 per cent, strikes 15 per cent) and South Korea (sanctions 48 per cent, strikes 5 per cent). Canadians are divided between a strong approach (sanctions 35 per cent, strikes 10 per cent) and softer approaches (diplomacy 42 per cent, no pressure 6 per cent). In all other countries, the weight of opinion is towards the less aggressive measures of using only diplomatic efforts or not pressuring Iran at all.

Support for allowing Iran to produce nuclear fuel for electricity, alongside a full program of UN inspections, is found not only in the US (55 per cent), Britain (71 per cent), and France (56 per cent), but also among Egyptians (86 per cent), Mexicans (79 per cent), Australians (64 per cent), Portuguese (59 per cent), Canadians (58 per cent), Italians (58 per cent), Kenyans (56 per cent), Indonesians (56 per cent) and Chinese (51 per cent). More modest support is found in Spain (49 per cent), Ghana (45 per cent), Nigeria (46 per cent), and Russia (33 per cent).

Majorities oppose the idea in Israel (62 per cent), Philippines (60 per cent), Turkey (54 per cent), Japan (54 per cent) and South Korea (51 per cent). Half of Germans are opposed as are 38 per cent of Central Americans.

Indians, Argentinians and Chileans are divided, with large numbers not providing an answer.

In total 32,039 citizens in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Egypt, El Salvador, France, Ghana, Germany, Great Britain, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Panama, the Philippines, Portugal, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, and the United States were interviewed face-to-face or by telephone between October 31, 2007 and January 25, 2008. Polling was conducted for the BBC World Service by the international polling firm GlobeScan and its research partners in each country. In 13 of the 31 countries, the sample was limited to major urban areas. The margin of error per country ranges from +/-2.4 to 4.4 per cent.

For more details, please see the full report (PDF)

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on December 18th, 2007
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

South Africa, With All Its Internal Squabbles, Has Fallen Far From The Example Mandela Set.
South Africa Of Today Endangers The Future Of Africa By Shooting At Africa’s Feet As We Witnessed
During the Night Of 5/11/2007 at the Time It Led The Election Of Zimbabwe To Chair The UN
Commission For Sustainable Development. As a Result The CSD Is Now Moribund and Has No
Secretary To Lead It Towards This Years Meeting That Was Supposed To Deal With Land Use.

The South Africans Showed Plain Chutzpah By Saying That If The Israelis Had Allowed their
Proposal To Be Presented By The Chairman Of The Second Committee, Rather Then Insisting
To Speak For Themselves As A Grown Up Member Of The UN, They And The Islamics Would
Not Have Abstained. So, If Today’s  South Africa Thinks That For Political Reasons They Are Clear
To Imply That One Sovereignty Is Less Then Another - That is Really No Less then A Suggestion
Advocating international Apartheid, and No Way That This Attitude Will be Accepted Outside The
Musty Corridors of The UN.

Ambassador Gillerman Was Fully Correct In Singling Out South Africa By Saying That He Honors
The Position Of Israel’s Self Appointed Arab Enemies, and That He Cannot See South Africa’s Position
Because there Is No South Africa-Israel Conflict - Except That, Seemingly, South Africa Is Just
Out There To Go Hand In Hand With Mugabe and Opt For Everything That Might Enrage The West.

We At www.SustainabiliTank.info have an IBSA Button for India, Brazil, and South Africa, as we
Considered These Three States As Potential Future Addition To The Present Five Permanent
Members Of The UN Security Council. We Expected These Three Countries, One From Each Of
The Under-Represented Continents, and Also With Potential For Becoming Economic Leaders
In The 21st Century, To Become Also Ethical Additions To A Reorganized UN. But 2007 Was A
Year When South Africa Has Done Most Everything Wrong - This Leaves Sub Sahara  Africa
Worse Off Then Leaderless. South Africa, For Reasons Unclear Does Harm To The Interests Of
The Poorer African States.

Israel Started Already In the 1970’s To Help African States Ny Bringing To Them Modern Agriculture,
And By Taking Their Technicians In For Training at Israeli Institutions. It Was Because of Arab
Interference That Africa Did Not Get Out More From The Israelis - Now It Is South Africa That Is
In The Way.

In UN Ag Tech Spat, Israel Calls “Shameful” Abstention by S. Africa, Which Feels Singled Out

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis

UNITED NATIONS, December 11 — Verbal skirmishes between Israel and the Arab Group and vice versa are expected at the UN. Tuesday in connection with what Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman called a rare feel-good story, a less intuitive fight broke out, Israel versus South Africa. Amb. Gillerman summoned reporters to the microphone outside the Security Council chamber to highlight the passage in the General Assembly’s Second Committee of a resolution sponsored by Israel, on the use of agricultural technology for development. He said it was the first Israeli-sponsored resolution to pass the Committee, and he noted that there were no votes against it. There were 29 abstentions, “mostly Arab states,” he said, “which I do not understand but which I respect.” Then Amb. Gillerman singled out South Africa’s abstention, and called it “shameful… unless it was a mistake… pressed the wrong button.” South Africa calls itself the leader of Africa, making its abstention all the worse, he said. The implication was that South Africa has abstained for the same “political” reason as the Arab states, but with less justification, at least in Israel’s eyes.

Inner City Press, after asking Amb. Gillerman some questions (video here, from Minute 8:58), sought the South African mission’s reason for abstention. It was explained that the draft resolution had not included the Africa focus found in the Millennium Declaration and the 2005 World Summit Outcome documents, lacking provisions about intellectual property, for example. Amendments had been attempted but rejected. A suggestion had been made to have the resolution be a proposal of the Chairman of the committee, but Israel, the mission said, fought to retain ownership.

Amb. Gillerman said that Israel does not want to be a “one issue” country, that it has been very active in sharing its agricultural technology in Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. He limited questions to issues of agriculture, “on this festive day,” he said. Inner City Press asked for details on Israel’s collaboration with the UN’s Food and Agricultural Organization. Amb. Gillerman referred the question to his “expert,” Ilan Fluss, who answered that FAO had coordinated with Israel on the resolution throughout the process.

South Africa has been fingered, by the U.S. mission and the New York Times, for opposing an General Assembly resolution denouncing rape in the service of governmental or military goals. There is, of course, South Africa’s position on Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, previously covered by Inner City Press. But beyond that, Reuters highlighted earlier this year that on a Holocaust resolution adopted by consensus, the South African representative was not present in the meeting, along with Iran and the Sudan. One diplomat asked, Why are we being singled out? Especially by Israel, which complains of disparate treatment?

unagte1.jpg

In the UN General Assembly, Amb. Dan Gillerman in action

Ilan Fluss, who coordinated the resolution, was previously Israel’s acting Ambassador in South Africa. Clearly there’s some tension there, to single out one of the 29 abstentions. Other abstainers included Algeria, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

It has been noted that the resolution still has to be considered by the full General Assembly, next week. Late Tuesday, Inner City Press asked the Permanent Observer of Palestine, Riyad Mansour, about the ag tech spat. Amb. Mansour riffed that “the Israeli delegate forgot the statement of his leaders in Annapolis, when they expressed thrills at seeing 16 Arab states there.” He suggested that Israel, if it was interested in more than “scoring political points… with a minor victory,” should have allowed the resolution to be converted into a consensus text sponsored by the Committee’s chair. Amb. Mansour specifically took issue with Amb. Gillerman having “lashed out” at South Africa, which he called “a country that no one can question their integrity with regard to justice and doing the right thing.” Video here. Afterwards, a Council diplomat mused that the tables were turned, with the Palestinians offering verbal defenses of South Africa. And so it goes at the UN.

###