|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 28th, 2010 I saw the show tonight and it made me think of Eric Falt who worked at UNEP then became #2 at UN DPI in New York where he replaced an Egyptian and is taking over the #2 job at UNESCO. Why that? It is because DRIVING THE SAUDIS was conceived in cooperation with The International Theatre Institute of Paris that is connected to UNESCO. This means that there is still some honesty left at UNESCO – something impossible to find at the Department of Information and Communication of the UN in New York. Under Egyptian Ahmad Fawzi the Department was all about safeguarding the interests of the oil kings. Under French Eric Falt there was no change – only a make believe of bringing in the UN Correspondents Association in decision making and the results are even worse then the starting line. What will he do when he gets to Paris? Will activities like showing DRIVING THE SAUDIS in conjunction with ITI be considered not Halal anymore? My first posting about this one woman show was based on their publicity and I thought that the waste of oil money by the oil kings is the main issue. Having seen it now my feeling is that it is much more about the place of a woman in the Saudi Royal family. Actually – there is no Saudi State only a privately owned huge piece of real estate that belonged to King Ibn Saud and was passed on to his descendants that multiply like rabbits – with 30 wives if not one hundred. We understood that there are only 4 at one time and they are released simply by saying three times, in the presence of a witness, that the owner sends them off. The whole thing turned my stomach and what is the UN for? What is a the new “UN Women” creation for? What did UNIFEM do all these years? Who at the UN has said anything about this sort of slavery at the age that overpopulation does us all in. A woman must produce sons in order to have a chance to survive some longer before being replace by a younger one. I clearly will not do justice in this second posting to the content of this reality play – and reality it is in every minute of it – in the real sense of the word. I will write more about it and hope it will get to the public’s attention and people will not shy away anymore from what it presents. The UN Headquarters are not worth the money the world spends on it if no effort is made to follow up on 21st century slavery – even if the women involved think that they benefit from the lavish life-style as long as it lasts. ————– The New York Fringe Festival is the largest multi-arts festival in North America, with more than 200 companies from all over the world performing for 16 days in more than 20 venues. DRIVING THE SAUDIS, with and by Jayne Amelia Larson, was [performed at the historic SoHo Playhouse and was about 2/3 full. Those that came early – about 50 people – looked to me as Middle Easterners. Those that arrived closer to the start were younger and looked like theater students. The SoHo Playhouse was home to playwrights like Edward Albee, Terrance McNally, A.R. Gurney … Previously it was under the Village South & Spectrum Theatre name, and even housed at the start of the last century the Tammany Hall (New York City Democrats Hall) “Huron Club.” I met the producer of the play – Patrick Terry – who hails from the NYU Tisch School of the Arts (Drama and Production) and is connected to Peter Goldfarb, Vice President of UN’s International Theatre Institute. From Terry I learned that the content of the play will be gathered also in a book form. Again, getting back to the history of the play, both, Larson and Terry said that it is all true. Larson who is a theater person, director, actress, in her own right, for money reasons took on this job of being part of a group of 15 drivers that were serving a family of 7 Saudi Royals and their entourage of 50 that includes cooks, nannies, security, secretaries …, that came to Los Angeles for aesthetic surgery and shopping that lasted 50 days. They were spread out in 4 hotels. When she got the job to be chauffeuring the princess and her daughter, it turned out that she had to chauffeur also the hairdresser to Las Vegas. The family came with $20 million and that money was spent. The help had to leave their passports with the hired ex-American military and one of the help, from Sudan, at the airport, when she got the passport in her hands, simply ran away and refused to board the private 747 for the return trip to Saudi Arabia. Larson digs into the social implications of what she saw and learned. She has sympathy for the three women she talks about – the princess, her daughter that would have loved to go to UCLA but was already promised in marriage, and a Lebanese nanny that with her earnings put through college her siblings back in Lebanon. She speaks of the men as always in need to have someone to insult bellow them in the pecking order. The men never looked into he eyes and this seemingly in an attempt to show respect. And yes – when she applied for the job, she was interviewed and there was no question about her driving only if she was not Jewish. (“You are not Jewish? Not Jewish!”) Oh yes, I will have more on this in further postings. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 25th, 2010
im Rahmen der Reihe Talking for Peace. A Karl Kahane Lecture Series laden wir Sie sehr herzlich zu der folgenden Veranstaltung ein: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 7.00 p.m. WOMEN CARRY THE BURDEN CONFLICT PREVENTION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Opening event in the framework of the 2010 International Meeting of National Committees for UNIFEM (Part of UN Women) presented by DER STANDARD Welcome: Gabriele Heinisch-Hosek, Federal Minister for Women and Civil Service Introduction to UN Resolution 1325: Maj. Gen. Johann Pucher, National Security Policy Director, Federal Ministry of Defence and Sports Keynote: Inés Alberdi, Executive Director of UNIFEM (Part of UN Women) Contributions: Sonja Biserko, Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, Serbia Taghreed El-Khodary, New York Times, Gaza Liberata Mulamula, Executive Secretary, International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, Burundi Anat Saragusti, Executive Director of Agenda, Israel Moderator: Gudrun Harrer, Senior Editor, DER STANDARD In cooperation with the Austrian National Committee for UNIFEM (Part of UN Women) and the support of the Federal Chancellery, the Federal Ministry for Women and Civil Service, Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue | Armbrustergasse 15 | 1190 Wien Please register: Tel.: 3188260/20 | Fax: 318 82 60/10 | e-mail: einladung.kreiskyforum@kreisky.org Melitta Campostrini ### | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 24th, 2010 http://asiasociety.org/style-living/food… Aug 13, 2010
Fasting this Ramadan? Follow these few key guidelines to eating well and staying healthy during the holy month. By Rafaya Sufi Fasting this Ramadan? Or have friends who are? Follow these few key guidelines to eating well and staying healthy during Ramadan. Since its foundation, Ramadan is celebrated with vigor amongst Muslim communities. A typical day of fasting consists of consuming an overnight breakfast at dawn, restricting any food and drink till sunset. Muslims may continue to eat and drink after the sun has set till the next morning’s fajr prayer at dawn. The key to maintaining a healthy lifestyle during the month depends on a few practical points. 1. Water: For starters, proper hydration is essential. Fasting does not mean that all bodily functions stop requiring water. Headaches, fatigue, fuzzy thinking, irritability, and illness are often caused by inadequate hydration. We need half our body weight each day to just maintain normal bodily functions. To determine your water needs, use this simple formula: Your body weight in pounds/2 = The amount of water you need to drink in ounces a day So, If you weigh 180 lbs/2 = 90 oz/day, minimum 2. Replace Sugar With Fruit (when possible): What’s better than eating a delicious slice of cake (or baklava, or brownie, or some chocolate mousse, or….) once you break your fast? Fruit! Yes, this is a hard one, so quit complaining and follow these instructions for healthier you. You may think you deserve a piece of your favorite dessert after all those hours of restraining, but sugar robs our bodies of minerals and vitamins. During a period of fasting, our bodies need to hold on to as many minerals and vitamins as possible, so don’t let them escape just by giving in to your craving (after all, this is a month of self-restraint). Try baking this nutritious Fried Banana recipe at home as an alternative to sugar-loaded desserts. 3. Soup: A quick, easy, and nutritious food to consume during Ramadan is soup. Soup provides deep nourishment and is easily absorbed by the body. It is also a great way to meet your water needs, and if you blend all the good stuff together, picky eaters will never question what they are eating! After you break your fast, have some soup, and make it a staple diet for the month. Try making some delicious, vitamin-packed Mulligatawny soup at home. 4. Eat Slowly/Don’t Overdo It: What’s the rush? You have all evening! There is a tendency to eat really fast amongst people breaking their fasts. Trying to pack in 101 activities within the first few minutes of breaking your fast, which includes eating 101 foods, can cause some serious indigestion. Avoid that awful feeling by slowing down. Take small bites so you can chew well. The longer you chew your food, the less work your digestive track needs to do and you absorb more nurturance. So overall, it’s a win-win situation. 5. Vitamins and Minerals: Load up on them! Unfortunately, food today is not as nutritious as it was once. Unless you’re consuming 100 percent organic foods, you’ll probably need to replenish your body with lost electrolytes and vitamins. The top nutrients to look at are vitamins C, B-complex, zinc, E, and A. Vitamins C, A, and E along with zinc are known as antioxidants, and unless you’re living under a rock, antioxidants are in–they’re the latest health trend these days because they do wonders for your body. Eat fresh fruits, berries, and vegetables in abundance! B-complex vitamins are great at relieving stress, so be generous with those. Most Americans are already deficient in the B-complex vitamins due to eating high amounts of refined and processed foods, so skip the white bread, and opt for a whole-wheat option instead. Enjoy this healthy Ginger Tea to combat that tired feeling after fasting all day. That’s all for now, folks. Have a healthy Ramadan! Watch and learn how to make Harira soup Traditional Moroccan Soup (Ramadan Special)### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 12th, 2010 AHEAD OF THE REFERENDUM IN SOUTH SUDAN – WATCHING THE BIRTH OF A NEW NATION. Saturday, Aug 07, 2010 THE REPORTER, Ethiopia – Free Press, Free Speech, Free Spirit
Juba: Facing a serious challenge in the future.http://ethiopianreporter.com/english/ind… Saturday, 31 July 2010
By Zekarias Sintayehu, The pilot instructs passengers to fasten our seatbelt as we approach to Juba International Airport. I try to get a glimpse of the city through the cabin window but all I can see is a marshy green area. There was a drizzle when I got off the plane but I could still feel gust of the humid air gushing over my face. I quickly headed to the so-called terminal. I believe that most of the time the passenger terminal tells you a lot about the country. And I tried to visualize how the city would be like. The terminal is very small and operates its activities in an old house. While I queue up to pass through the terminal, an immigration officer asked me to give him my yellow fever vaccination card. I told him that I didn’t have it. Then he told me to pay 20 Sudanese pounds which is above 8 USD. “Why should I pay the money?” I requested. He replied confidently, “It is a fine for not bringing the card.” He then pointed to a bunch of his colleagues’ and told me to talk to them. A slim young guy approached me and uttered “What is the problem?” I told him that I did not bring my vaccination card. “Did he tell you to pay 20 USD” was his quick response, referring to his friend. I was a little bit surprised with the drama at the airport. Finally, he lets me go because I told him that I didn’t have an exchange. After all the hustle at the airport, I was lucky enough to pass through the terminal. Another friend told me a true story about the immigration officers which took place a couple of years ago. They used to ask for a yellow fever vaccination card when passengers departed from Juba. I finally met a friend who was waiting for me outside the terminal. While driving to my hotel with him, I thought I was still in Ethiopia because the city resembles the Gambella region. The big screen was blazing Ethiopian music at the open air bar. High ranking Ethiopian officials and businessmen came here every day to chill out and update each other. There were also Sudanese, Ugandans and Eritrean at the open air bar. As one friend told me, most of the officials stay at hotels since they don’t have homes. Meanwhile, the government has decreed that officials should build their own homes, as it cannot afford the exorbitant hotel expenses. Habesha Continental Hotel is located on a riverside and the graceful White Nile draining from Lake Victoria streams down to Khartoum. I was very pleased to see ships carrying folks and goods on the river. As I heard, the ships take three weeks to get from Juba to Khartoum. I also saw small boats passing by the river. In addition, the locals fish on the river. Though I didn’t get a chance to see the Blue Nile, it was a marvelous experience to watch the graceful White Nile. Unlike Ethiopia, the Injera (Ethiopian bread) is made from rice. I was very eager to test the white rice Injera. To be honest, there is a remarkable difference from with teff Injera but I can still stomach the rice Injera. The next morning I went out to explore the city. The famous means of transportation at the town are the motorbikes which are called “Boda Boda.” Most of the motorbikes are owned by Ugandans. After I negotiated the price with driver to drop me off at my friend’s house in Juba, I jumped on and started to enjoy a ride on the “Boda Boda”. While riding the bike, the wind was constantly blowing the sand into my eyes, so I had to hide my face behind the back of the driver. I also visited the biggest market place in the city called “Konyo Konyo.” Unfortunately, at that day was a public holiday most of the shops were closed. Everything is sold in “Konyo Konyo” staring from consumers goods to electronics and cars. The shops which were open were selling fruits, onions, potatoes, meat, and other consumers goods. That day the city was somehow calm since it was commenting the fifth year of John Garang’s death memorial. Officials and many folks memorized their hero by going to his funeral place. I also had the chance to travel by minibuses which are mostly owned by Ethiopians and Eritreans. The locals refer to Ethiopians and Eritrean as “Habesh.” Though the Habeshs’ own the minibuses, they can’t drive in the city due to the new legislation imposed by the government. All the taxi drivers are Sudanese. Most of the big hotels in Juba are owned by Eritreans and the hotel I stayed is the only big hotel owned by an Ethiopian. But there are many small bars and hotels owned by Ethiopians. I visited a Ugandan bar which is located next to my hotel. There are many tents in the compound which are ready for rent. Their price, 100 USD per day, amazes was what amazes me most during my stay at Juba. The temperature, which was around 31 degree centigrade, was relatively cold during my visit of Juba. But I still needed to be in my air conditioned room after midday. The city badly needs network infrastructures if it is to cop up with the emerging economy. The city gets electricity from generators and areas in the outskirt of the city are still in darkness. Frankly, a tough homework awaits Juba city, which will be the capital city of the Southern Sudan after the 2011 referendum. ——————- August 10, 2010 (KHARTOUM) as per www.SudanTribune.com – Southern Sudan Referendum Commission denied its intention to ask the Sudanese presidency to postpone the referendum scheduled for January 2011.
Pagan Amum, Secretary General of Southern Sudan’s ruling party SPLM, rejected the request stressing “any attempt to delay the referendum would be considered as reneging on the CPA”. The Chairman of the Southern Sudan Referendum Commission, Mohamed Ibrahim Khalil, in remarks aired by the Sudanese radio on Monday dismissed reports about the intention of the Commission to submit a request for the president to delay the referenda on southern Sudan’s independence. Demanding to delay the referendum is a “political valuation and the Commission has a legal and constitutional mission according to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the Interim Constitution and the referendum law,” Khalil pointed out. Tarek Osman Al-Tahir, a member of the commission who requested the delay said that it would be impossible for the commission to achieve the completion of voters’ registration three months before the vote as required by the law. “We have only two choices left: skip some of the procedures, which would be unacceptable because it could affect the endorsement of the referendum result or resort to the other choice of a limited delay to the referendum timetable to complete these procedures,” Tahir said. However Khalil said they filed a letter to the presidency in which they demanded more support to enable the referendum commission to perform its functions. He said the commission will start work next week. He said that in the south 80% of structures of the Commission had been completed, adding that they are currently preparing a budget for the referendum process. He said the referendum body signed a number of agreements with the United Nations and U.S. Aid to provide technical and logistical support for the referendum. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 31st, 2010
### | |||||||||||
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/lebanon/7916925/Lebanon-facing-crisis-if-Hizbollah-charged-over-political-murder.htmlLebanon facing crisis if Hizbollah charged over political murder. Lebanon could be pitched into crisis if a tribunal set up to investigate the murder of the former prime minister, Rafik Harari, recommends charging Hizbollah members.by Damien McElroy, Foreign Affairs Correspondent
Rafik Harari, pictured, Photo: AP
Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri was killed in a massive blast on Beirut’s Corniche in 2005. Photo: AP
– Indications that the international tribunal investigating the massive car bomb that killed the veteran Lebanese leader would indict Hizbollah operatives has drawn a furious reaction from the leadership of the Iranian-backed terrorist group. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbollah, raised the threat of withdrawal from the national unity government as it fought the tribunal, which he condemned as an “Israeli project”. Related Articles:
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 28th, 2010 The following are examples from today’s publication of the UN’s best friend – the $1 Billion UN Foundation’s UN Wire. I see [Saddam Hussein] like Nebuchadnezzar, the emperor of Mesopotamia — an utterly ruthless, brutal man who sat with a revolver in his pocket and could use it to shoot you.” Blix faults U.S., British over pre-Iraq war intel http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/world/… —– ================== Security Council mulls future of Darfur mission: Kidnapped German, American aid workers in Darfur speak out: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk… – International terror networks taking root in DR Congo? ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 19th, 2010 South Sudan’s road to independence.By Barney Jopson Published: March 20 2010
http://happyarabnews.blogspot.com/2006/1… Barely an hour into a journey that was about to get longer and second lieutenant Thomas Bakata’s Chinese motorbike was handling as it usually does on the route from Juba to Yei: like a bucking bronco. It jerked and jolted over sandy ridges and stony pits as the rabbit-ear flaps on his green hat flailed in the wind, and the Wellington boots trussed to boxes on the back wriggled to get free. On Bakata’s number plate was a flag belonging to a land-locked country-in-waiting at the rawest end of Africa’s wilderness spectrum. This is south Sudan, and the dirt track its lifeline to civilisation – a road so rough that drivers say taking it more than three times a week will scramble your internal organs. Bakata, a regular traveller, lurched around another bend and squinted through his counterfeit Ray-Bans: a rope-and-streamer roadblock had been thrown up. He sighed and applied the brake, bringing the Senke 125cc to a halt. “How long will we wait here?” he asked, showing off a gap between his front teeth. The answer was 30 minutes, time enough to talk. “This land of ours,” he told me, “we have been many years fighting. Some of our fathers fought, so we have been fighting too.” He became a soldier 20 years ago, joining the then-guerrilla ranks of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) six years into the second phase of Africa’s longest civil war. The marginalised south was rebelling against a brutal Arab-led regime in Khartoum – the latest in a succession – and the bullets and flames of a scorched-earth campaign had arrived in Bakata’s village. He was 18 years old. It was a war that killed two million people – equivalent to 20-25 per cent of the region’s population today – either in raids or battles, or through the hunger and disease that spread around them. The road where Bakata had stopped was a key fighting ground in the mid-1990s, when Juba was a garrison town controlled by Khartoum and surrounded by the SPLA. That is how the path and its hinterland came to be peppered with landmines – and why Bakata’s journey had been delayed. On the other side of the barrier, personnel from MineWolf Systems, a Swiss-German demining company, clomped forward in suits that were half-astronaut, half-beekeeper, clearing the last vestiges of the civil war from beneath the soil. The conflict began in late 1955, a few months before Sudan gained independence from colonial Britain, and was passed down through generations. It was in part about race and religion, about the people of the south asserting that they were different from but equal to northerners. This came in the face of racist Islamist campaigns to impose Arab culture, Islam and sharia law across Sudan. Most southerners are Christian or have traditional beliefs that imbue the natural world with spiritual power. “We worship the ostrich, but we consider it like Jesus, like a mediator,” one man explained. “It is not a God itself.” There were also issues of poverty and injustice: there are huge disparities in income and living standards within Sudan and a key reason, beyond the effects of the war, is the economic exploitation of the south by the north, which came to be symbolized by northern slave-raiding. “It’s Sudan: it means ‘the black people’,” says Bakata. “We are the real Sudanese. Those who are brown, they came like the Arabs. They came from the north to sit with us and we the black people got annoyed because there was no development. If you go to Khartoum, you see lots of things.” Strapped over Bakata’s shoulder was the same Kalashnikov rifle he was given when he joined the liberation struggle, its butt chipped and scratched. “It is working okay,” he said, “because we don’t use it anyhow. It is only for protection. Last time was when we were fighting.” In 2005, after three years of intense negotiations and international pressure, the war ended with a peace deal between the SPLA and the Khartoum regime of president Omar al-Bashir. The deal gave the south partial autonomy and provided for a six-year interim period in which attempts would be made to heal the north-south rift through a more equitable distribution of power and resources. That has not succeeded. “The Arabs, we are over with them,” Bakata said dismissively. Instead, attention has shifted to the peace deal’s get-out clause: a referendum on southern self-determination due next January in which an overwhelming majority of southerners are expected to vote for secession. It’s possible the referendum will be delayed; it’s possible Khartoum will choose to fight another war rather than let the south go; it’s possible the international community will get last-minute jitters over the rupture and try to thwart it. If none of that happens, south Sudan will become the world’s newest country as early as next July (following a six-month transitional period). But what kind of country? Plenty of places have been rebuilt after devastating wars, but nowhere has a nation-state been built from nothing in six years. “This is still bare-bones stuff,” said one British aid worker. “You’re looking at society before civilisation.”
The future capital of any future country is Juba, situated on the Bahr el-Jebel stretch of the White Nile river, a boom town in a region also known as the Wild South. The main unit of construction here is the shipping container; there is no public water supply; electricity comes from personal diesel generators; and only last year did the length of its paved roads surpass four miles. Yet it is home to a circus cast of outsiders who have flocked here since 2005: roughshod profiteers, UN drones in pressed shirts, bleeding heart aid workers, insta-fix briefcase consultants. They are attracted by its danger and its desperation and they have given Juba its signature impermanence and incoherence. “There’s this sense that everything arrived yesterday and that it’s changing before your eyes,” said one man on the payroll of a European government. The area is the ancestral home of the Bari people and that’s why you can turn a corner and stumble across a community of tukul mud huts with conical straw roofs, or a team of hammer swingers making one of the region’s few indigenous products: broken rocks. This is the thing about Juba: it’s got bits of the pre-industrial era and it’s got bits of the 21st-century, but there’s a gap where the western 20th century could have been. So it has mass illiteracy and US aid workers carrying Kindles – but precious few school textbooks. It has inter-tukul rumour mills and a “3.75G” mobile phone network – but no landlines. It has women fetching river water by hand and a few dust-churning Hummers – but no donkey-drawn carts. It also has oil – lots of it. Ninety-eight per cent of its non-aid budget this year comes from crude, so a future country is likely to be the world’s most oil-dependent. It is also headed towards being more dependent than anywhere else on aid agencies: they are estimated to provide 85 per cent of both education and health services in the region. During the war, the south’s main settlements had been garrison towns controlled by Khartoum whose economies were run by white-robed merchants from the north. Those merchants fled after the 2005 peace deal and left an economic vacuum that only risk-taking outsiders could fill: Ugandan steel suppliers, a Chinese mineral water trader, Eritrean hotel owners, a Canadian farmer, and so on. They got the region working but they have also stoked resentment at profiteering. Indeed, business people told me they were pocketing profit margins of 50, 100 or even 200 per cent. Evan Hadjimichael, a Greek born in Egypt and joint owner of Notos, a Mediterranean restaurant that tries to be different by offering “value”, said: “Everyone here tries to make a quick buck. They have an absurd pricing structure.” Part of that is because no one knows whether national elections scheduled next month or the referendum next January will trigger renewed conflict, or whether the tenuous rule of law will protect them from land and tax grabs. Stories circulate of businesses that lost out in disputes with locals who got their way through brute force – for example, KK Security of Kenya, whose operation was violently seized. Nestled among rolls of chain-link fencing and spaghetti-like stacks of steel cables, Chesta Musoke reclined at a “technology hub” grafted on to the side of a corrugated iron kiosk, reading an old copy of Red Pepper, a scandal-sheet from his native Uganda. A laid-back sophisticate, he looked out of place among the grizzled traders and truckers who have made Juba’s Mawunna trading centre the drop-off point for goods at the end of the Yei road. But they appreciate him for charging their mobile phone batteries – using a bank of sockets available for two Sudanese pounds (60p) a go – and for injecting some cheer into the grim workaday scene by pumping out music from his computer. He tossed down his newspaper as I approached to chat. When I asked about the locals, he jabbed a finger at a picture on his computer screen of Destiny’s Child, the female R&B group, and told me about the reaction of his archetypal south Sudanese man. “He sees her here and he says he wants to talk to her. Now. Now. He is not yet aware of technology,” he said. “You bring the radio, he listens, then he comes back with money and says he wants to buy the songs inside. He sees the mirror and he wants to pass through it because he sees the traffic moving inside.” The long civil war left most of the people frozen in time for 50 years while the rest of the world – including city dwellers in neighbouring African countries – raced ahead. Now they have been asked to cover in six years the ground that took the rest of us decades, centuries. “It’s a culture of no exposure to so many things,” says Suzanne Jambo, the garrulous head of external relations for the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, the political wing of the former rebel army, which rules the south. “It’s like baby steps. You have to take people on baby steps.” The lack of familiarity with the modern world extends to concepts such as work, employment, commerce – even farming. South Sudan oozes fertility, but during mango season an overpowering stench assails parts of the region because heaps of the fruit are left rotting where they fall. Meanwhile, expats in Juba drink Ceres-branded mango juice imported from Uganda. “There’s a culture of dependency, a culture of not taking pride in earning your own income,” says Jambo. “It’s a way of thinking. It’s like an entitlement. Do you know? That’s how it is.” Beyond war itself, such attitudes have their roots in Operation Lifeline Sudan, a food relief effort run by the UN and aid agencies during the conflict; it kept hundreds of thousands of civilians alive, but is now criticised for having pulled them into garrison towns and killed off agriculture and self-reliance. Members of the diaspora returning to south Sudan are helping to counteract this but they are often overpowered by a postwar indigenous economy that can be summarised as “oil revenues in, state salaries out”. South Sudan’s former guerrilla leaders turned public sector employment into a patronage tool, creating a state payroll of more than 300,000, including the army. It is as messy as it is unproductive: there are drivers with no cars, schools with more cleaners than teachers. But via hand-outs given to relatives the salaries probably support up to half the population.
The labels have been stuck on the store-room shelves – ampicillin, flagil, septazole – but the spaces above them are empty. The adjustable baby-delivery chairs gleam after a scrub, but some do not work because their screws have fallen out. The amateur midwives are literate and hard-working, but they tend to panic when a labour doesn’t go according to plan. This is the maternity ward in the Juba Teaching Hospital; too often it is also the scene of avoidable tragedy. “Recognising complications during birth is an issue,” Sake Jemelia, head of the ward, told me. “Most of the mothers die because of that … The community midwives run up and down calling for the doctor. But the doctor is not there and there is no blood to replace what is lost.” South Sudan’s human development indicators are among the worst in the world. The UN spells them out on a list entitled “Scary Statistics”. Under maternal mortality it says: “One out of seven women who become pregnant in S Sudan will probably die of pregnancy-related causes.” Babies are only in marginally less danger: 102 die per 1,000 live births. A non-Sudanese doctor who had visited the maternity ward told me: “You see the babies are pulled out like logs, they are convulsing, and you ask the midwife and she doesn’t know anything. I just made the sign of the cross. I don’t want to go there again.” The hospital’s reliance on amateur staff is explained by another statistic on the UN list: there are only 100 certified midwives in the whole of the south Sudan, or roughly one per 100,000 people. The picture for water, sanitation and education – the other basic services – is equally grim. Luka Biong Deng, minister of presidential affairs, said the figures were better than five years ago but had been adversely affected by a decision to focus public spending on roads and buildings. Yet south Sudan has also received just over $2bn in foreign aid since 2005. Why has it made so little difference? The region seems to embody two of aid’s recurring weaknesses: short-termism and a failure to understand local circumstances. “It’s inter-generational change you need in south Sudan,” said Allan Duncan, a former aid worker who, as a KPMG consultant, became the new government’s Mr Fix-it in its early days. “It’s not a five to 10-year time frame. That’s where a lot of people had unrealistic expectations about what they could achieve.”
Rather than building the country methodically, he said donors and NGOs had set time horizons that end at next year’s referendum, triggering a rush to launch dozens of over-optimistic and ill-considered projects. “It’s been like an end-of-the-world party,” Duncan told me in his Nairobi office. “2011 became this cliff and everyone knew you’d have to step off it. But no one knew if it was 1ft high or 100ft high. So there’s never been any form of institution-building for 2011 and beyond.” Members of the aid brigade in Juba spend a lot of time blaming one another for what’s gone wrong, but the most popular punchbag is the World Bank, which was chosen to administer a flagship recovery fund into which western governments poured $524m. The bank had little experience of post-conflict zones, it could not attract good staff to Juba, and it applied criteria that were ludicrously stringent in a place as raw as south Sudan. The result: by the end of last year, little more than a third of the money had been spent, leaving donors furious. Most of the money that has got out has gone to aid agencies. Some of their staff reminded me with pride that they provide the bulk of health services in south Sudan. “We are basically the ministry of health,” said a worker with Médecins Sans Frontières. But others voiced the criticisms that come with that. “They set up completely parallel systems and they have reacted very self-righteously when someone in the SPLM tries to control them,” said John Ashworth, a Sudan veteran who heads the Nairobi office of IKV Pax Christi, a Christian campaign group. Aid agencies get barbs elsewhere in Africa for letting governments ignore their responsibility to provide services to their citizens. But in south Sudan, the international community made the opposite error: it tried to manage too much in partnership with a novice government that knew as little about governing as its people did about farming or computers. One World Bank official told me wearily about “weeks and weeks” that had been lost as the ministry of legal affairs vetted agreements for recovery fund projects. “The concept of general conditions of contracts seemed not to be known,” he said. “Guys were trying to negotiate what is force majeure, which the whole world has accepted.” Duncan, the Mr Fix-it from KPMG, recalled his realisation in 2005 that some of the finance ministry officials who were due to be trained in budgets, procurement and auditing would first need remedial maths classes.
When 2nd Lt Thomas Bakata was joining the struggle, eight-year old Philip Achuoth had already been in a refugee camp for two years. He was another face of the civil war, a Lost Boy: one of thousands who trekked more than 1,000 miles to safety, losing touch with their families and seeing friends picked off by air force bombers and Arab militias, lions and crocodiles, exhaustion and starvation. “A lot of my colleagues died,” Achuoth told me. “You would see them lying by the path. Or you would say, ‘Wake up, wake up,’ to the one next to you in the morning, you would push him, and he was dead. You would feel like you would be the next.” Today he is a towering man with a domed forehead framed by an Afro. I met him at a Juba restaurant whose scattershot menu offered rogan josh and pizzas, chicken chow mein and vegetable quesadillas. He didn’t smile once. His earnestness was overpowering and his angst about south Sudan obvious. What bothered him above all was cronyism, corruption and the inaction of the government. “For we who assess development in terms of quality of life, it has not done anything,” he said. That sentiment is common, and although the former rebels are unlikely to lose power in national elections next month, they are braced to be chastised by the people. The SPLM itself is split along policy lines, between radicals who want to spurn the north after referendum day, pragmatists who see a need to co-operate with it and unionists who still want Sudan to remain as one. It is also divided between leaders from the south’s largest tribe, the Dinka, and those from the Nuer tribe, notably the vice-president and the army’s deputy commander-in-chief: they both fought against the SPLM in a war within the civil war and they control former militias imperfectly integrated into the southern army. Indeed, the army as a whole is still fragmented into a series of half-reformed guerrilla groups, which are often reviled by the local populations they prey on and not disciplined by an effective command structure. As for the people themselves, ethnic violence surged last year as more than 2,000 people were killed by rival tribes in disputes over cattle, water and grazing land. The upheaval of the civil war has created lingering suspicions, too – between those who were in garrison towns during the war, those who lived in rebel-held territory and those who fled the country. What has held the fractious south together in the past five years has been its need to manage Khartoum’s political chicanery, get to the referendum and prepare for the contingency of renewed war. If it becomes independent without conflict, the “Arabs” against whom it has defined itself will be diminished as a common enemy. That is when the south’s internal divisions could come to the fore, threatening the security and cohesion of a place where guns are everywhere and belligerence hangs in the air. It is not the foreigners who will determine its future; that will hinge on the ability of the south Sudanese to find mutual interests and a unified identity. Achuoth said that, having cheated death and the circling vultures who feasted on fallen Lost Boys during their long march, he now wanted to help other survivors return home. But at the very least, that home must be safe. “This liberation struggle,” he said, “I have seen too much. I want to see a good outcome. I don’t want to see other people experiencing the same, going back to square zero.” Barney Jopson is the FT’s East Africa correspondent ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on June 29th, 2010 TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 2010 Q&A: “There Is Almost Total Impunity for Rape in Congo” UNITED NATIONS, Jun 28 (IPS) – Sexual violence against women has become part of modern warfare around the world. In some countries, women cannot even go out to draw water without fear of being attacked and raped. On Apr. 1, Margot Wallström became the Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Her job is to investigate abuses and make recommendations to the Security Council. The appointment of Wallstrom, currently a vice president of the European Commission, comes amidst continued reports of gender violence, including rape and sexual abuse both locally and by humanitarian aid workers and U.N. peacekeepers, mostly in war zones and in post-conflict societies. The incidents of sexual attacks, both on women and children, have come from several countries, including Cote d’Ivoire, Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Haiti, Burundi, Guinea and Liberia. One of Wallstrom’s first assignments was a trip to the DRC, a nation she calls “the rape capital” of the world. Excerpts from the interview with Wallström follow. Q: Tell us about your trip. A: Congo has attracted attention in the media [as a place that is suffering] systematic rape in war. One statistic quoted is 200,000 rapes since the beginning of the war 14 years ago, and it is certainly an underestimate. When in Congo, I met government representatives and particularly women who had been raped and violated. It was interesting but also disappointing – nothing is getting better and more and more civilians are committing rapes. But I should be fair and say that there has been progress, the government has introduced laws against rape, it has a national plan and there is political will. There is a lot to do to implement the legislation, but now there is an ambitious legal ground to stand on to be implemented by the police, judiciary and health care. Q: What are the roots of the problem? A: The sexual violence in Congo is the result of the war between the many armed groups. To put women in the front line has become a part of modern warfare. Men often feel threatened in times of conflict and stay inside, but the women have to go out and get water and firewood and go to the fields to find food. In many cases they’ll be the first to be attacked. Especially if there is no paid national army that can protect civilians, rape is a part of the looting and crimes against the innocent. In addition, there is almost total impunity for rape in the Congo. Q: The U.N. has its own force, MONUC, in Congo to protect civilians. What is being done to help women? A: MONUC has had to adjust their operations after the conditions in the country. For example, MONUC has special patrols which escort women to health care clinics and markets. Q: The U.N. and the Congolese government are discussing when the U.N. should leave the country. What would happen if the U.N. left the Congo now? A: We have reason to be worried if the United Nations would leave the Congo. It is still unsettled in some parts of the country and the U.N. provides logistics for many of the NGOs operating in the country, and they rely in the U.N. What is happening right now is that [the government] wants to show that it can protect the country itself – it’s a part of the debate on independence. Q: How do feel when you hear about U.N. peacekeepers committing atrocities? A: Just one example is too much. It destroys our confidence in the U.N.’s ability to do great things. Q: There is criticism that the U.N. is a bureaucratic and inflexible organisation. Do you agree? A: In every large organisation there is critisism like this. After 10 years in the European Commission, I can recognise such trends here, there is always. But basically, there are high hopes and great confidence in the U.N. and the energy and passion that exists for the U.N. is very useful. Q: The Security Council has promised to focus even more on the issue of violence against women. Which countries should be focused on? A: Congo is a given, also Darfur and a number of other countries in Africa. We will also focus on Liberia, where it is more a post-conflict society which has been brutalised and where rape is the most common offence. We cannot be in all countries with conflicts, we will comply with the Security Council agenda. This is a problem that not only exists in Africa. Q: What can your staff do on site? A: Our team of legal experts can help a country to establish a modern legislation. Impunity is the foundation of the problem, the women have to go with guilt and the men go free. We must try to understand how such a culture is created and how it can be a method of warfare. Then we can stop it. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 28th, 2010 The interesting day was organized by an active excellent Media Relations Officer of the New York office of the US Department of State – Ms. Melissa Waheibi. She worked this out with the UN MALU (Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit) as we had to get a Temporary Media Pass to the UN. Our UN hostess was Ms. Robin Dellarocca an Information Officer with the Department of Public Information (DPI), Strategic Communications Division, who was with us at the beginning and at the end of the day, as well as at that Noon Briefing. Most of the day we were accompanied by Ms. Isabelle Broyer, who is the new Chief of MALU within the UN DPI. She was previously Chief of Guided Tours Section in the UN Outreach that also belongs under the DPI, and she was very gracious and started the day by giving us the tour of the old UN – that is the tall building that blocks for the Manhattanites the view to the East River. The problem is that this building is being mothballed for a while because of the need to remove plenty of asbestos that was put into its construction back in the years 1949-1950 when the real estate firm of Wallace Harrison, the personal architectural adviser for the Rockefeller family, was the lead architect for the building. The final project derived from the drawings of Oscar Niemeyer and Le Corbusier. Now, a so called temporary North Lawn building (TNLB), was created this year, and for all practical purposes the UN has changed a lot. We did not go to that building. Our group numbered 11 people. Seven that had no UN Press Credentials, including our leader from the Foreign Press Center, New York, and four who were actually accredited journalists with the UN DPI. Our Event was called a “United Nations Seminar For Foreign Journalists.” These people come from all over the world and report about the US which in most cases, at least for those stationed in new York, includes interest in the UN. Many do not have a UN accreditation because of the difficult process of getting one, in a few cases their beet does not include the UN – they were all clearly eager to learn more about the UN. The fact that some UN Press-Card holders were also on the tour is a result from the simple reality that the UN DPI does not have such introductory tours for its own newly accredited correspondents – and those that participated in the Seminar were clearly interested in getting some minimal insight into the general workings of the UN. After all – not all journalists covering the UN believe that rewriting UN Press Releases is called journalism. Eventually we settled around a large table in the office the DPI has for its liaison to the NGOs accredited with DPI, and later, when that room was no more available, we moved next door to class-room setting, and speakers from various departments from the UN and from some affiliates came to tell us about their ongoing activities. Our morning covered three activities beyond the introductory welcome-tour: The Office for the Coordinator of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA); The Acting Chief, UN Resources – Promotion and Distribution Unit, UN Multimedia of DPI; and the Noon Briefing. Our afternoon covered four sessions and closing: The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Deputy Director; The Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO); The Chief of External Communications at the United Nations Development Programme who was specific on the Millennium Development Goals; and The Chief of the Security Council Secretariat Branch that introduced us to the work of the UN Security Council. So what about the Noon Briefing? Combining my notes with the official transcript Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York From the Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General, May 25, 2010.Today’s noon briefing was by Martin Nesirky, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General. Good afternoon everybody. I understand we have a number of international journalists joining us today from the New York Foreign Press Centre. So, welcome to you and welcome to everybody else at the briefing. **Press Conference and Stakeout Today A couple of press conferences today, immediately following Security Council consultations, Ad Melkert, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Iraq, will speak to correspondents at the Security Council stakeout position. And then at 12:30 p.m., here in this auditorium, there will be a press conference on the launch of several campaigns to combat violations of children’s rights. **Secretary-General’s Remarks This morning, the Secretary-General marked today the 10th anniversary of the adoption of the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, with UNICEF’s new Executive Director, Anthony Lake. The two Protocols — one on prostitution and child pornography, the other on children and armed conflict — have been endorsed by two thirds of all Member States so far. Mr. Nesirky spelled out further, beyond the language of the official release, that in too many places children are still treated as commodities. The Secretary-General urged all countries to adopt these instruments within the next two years in order to provide children with a moral and legal shield. He said that in too many places children are seen as commodities, treated as criminals, instead of being protected as victims, and that in too many conflicts, children are used as soldiers, spies or human shields. We have his full remarks in my office. And this afternoon, the Secretary-General will address the pledging Conference for the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. And that’s at 3 p.m., in the ECOSOC Chamber of the North Lawn Building. **Security Council The Security Council heard a briefing by Ad Melkert this morning — that’s the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Iraq. Melkert told Council members that the recent elections and the Government expected to be formed based on the election results offer a new opportunity to strengthen Iraq’s sovereignty. It will also allow Iraqis to move with greater determination towards reconciliation. He added, however, that a host of challenges remain, including the continued violence across Iraq, which so far this year has claimed 2,000 lives and wounded 5,000 civilians. The Council is now in consultations on Iraq, after which Melkert intends to speak to reporters at the Security Council stakeout position. We have copies of his remarks to the Council in my office. And following the consultations on Iraq, the Security Council will hold an open meeting on the situation in Chad, the Central African Republic and the subregion. **Israel-Palestine The Secretary-General sent a message today to the UN International Meeting in Support of the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process, which is being held in Istanbul under the theme “Ending the Occupation and Establishing the Palestinian State”. The Secretary-General’s message was delivered by Robert Serry, the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process. In it, the Secretary-General expressed his satisfaction that, after a prolonged period of delay and setbacks, proximity talks are finally under way. He also encourages the parties to avoid provocations or breaches of the Road Map or international law. He welcomes the modest progress that has been achieved, with the Government of Israel facilitating a number of priority projects and widening the list of commercial goods allowed into Gaza. We have copies of his message in my office. And separately, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) says that Gaza’s agriculture sector is being hit hard. OCHA says that more than 60 per cent of Gaza households are now food insecure, a situation that agriculture could have helped redress. However, Israel’s import and access restrictions continue to suffocate the local agriculture sector and directly contribute to rising food insecurity. There is more in a press release from OCHA in my office. ** Haiti We have an announcement from the United Nations Mission in Haiti, MINUSTAH. President [René] Préval and the Secretary-General’s Special Representative in Haiti, Edmond Mulet, have agreed to establish an independent commission to investigate the incident in Les Cayes Prison on 19 January. The Commission will be a joint United Nations-Haiti effort. Further details on its composition and mandate will be soon provided by MINUSTAH. **Press Conference Tomorrow A couple of press conferences for tomorrow: at 11 a.m., there will be a press conference to launch the updated 2010 United Nations World Economic Situation and Prospects report. And at 12:30 p.m., Wilfried Lemke, Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Sports for Development and Peace, will hold a press conference about the upcoming 2010 FIFA Football World Cup in South Africa, to take place from 11 June until 11 July, and the activities of the UN system around this event. And finally at 1 p.m., there will be a press conference by Ambassador David Balton, the Chair of the Review Conference on the Fish Stocks Agreement, who will brief on efforts to strengthen international action to manage and conserve fish stocks on the high seas. **Secretary-General on Africa Day So I can also tell you that today is Africa Day, and in a message to mark the Day, the Secretary-General says that this year’s celebration has particular significance as it marks the fiftieth anniversary of independence of several Francophone African States and Nigeria, the continent’s most populous nation. The Secretary-General also notes in his message that by consistently reminding the international community of its responsibility to the most vulnerable, and affirming that we are all members of a global family of nations, Africa has helped to reshape the global agenda. ================================== So questions, please. Yes. { and there were four correspondents that asked questions – just only four } =============================== **Questions and Answers (A) Mr. Laolu Akande, Bureau Chief (North America) THE GUARDIAN of NIGERIA. His questions are usually about Africa and the African Union. Question: A couple of questions. One, yesterday the Secretary-General announced that he was going to Nigeria. Do you have more details as to when he is going to go and, apart from the President, who else he is going to be meeting? Then secondly, on the issue of child rights, I see that the Secretary-General has spoken about that already today. There is a senator in Nigeria who just married an Egyptian 13-year-old girl. I was wondering whether the Secretary-General will say something about that? Spokesperson: The second, I didn’t quite get that. Correspondent: There is senator in Nigeria… Spokesperson: Yes. Correspondent: …Senator [Ahmad Sani] Yerima, who just married a 13 year old Egyptian, and I was hoping that the Secretary-General will say something about that. Spokesperson: Well, on the first question, which is the precise schedule for the Secretary-General’s trip to Nigeria, we don’t yet have the precise layout and the full itinerary. But we will let you know as soon as we do. But it will be after the trip to South Africa. As the Secretary-General mentioned, there is then a leg of that particular trip which takes him to South Africa, to West Africa, I beg your pardon, and Nigeria is part of that. But exactly where, at what point in the schedule hasn’t been fixed yet. So we will let you know as soon as we can. On the second, I don’t think I need to say more than has already been stated about the rights of children. I think the Secretary-General has been quite clear on that. =============== (B) Mr. Masood Haider, who is registered with THE DAILY DAWN of Karachi, Pakistan, Leading English Newspaper of Pakistan, but when I looked it up already three years ago, I did not find there articles by Masood. On his personal google listings there is much material about him being the President of the UN Correspondents Association (UNCA), and articles on www.MaximsNews.com. His questions always involve the Middle Eas and end up with an attack on Israel. So, Masood. Question: …specifically about this particular senator, I know that he has made comments. I want to know whether the United Nations considers itself as having a moral voice, you know, to speak, you know, when such violations of something that it thinks is important to talk about when there is direct violation even by the people who have the power. Doesn’t the Secretary-General mean to raise the moral voice against such things? Spokesperson: The Secretary-General’s moral voice on this question is very clear. But that doesn’t mean that we have to comment on the specific cases. But I have stated what the general principle is and so has the Secretary-General. And I think that that’s a fairly clear answer. Yes, Masood. MASOOD HAIDER: Talking about the moral voice, the disclosure yesterday in the newspaper in London that Israel offered South Africa nuclear warheads in exchange for certain things, and how is that going to impact the nuclear negotiations going on over here at the United Nations on NPT, which Israel refuses to join nor was it disclosed how many weapons it has. So the Secretary-General was asked this question yesterday, which he did not answer, I mean [inaudible]. Spokesperson: Well, the Secretary-General did answer the question yesterday, and I have no need to elaborate on what he said. Question: But in his… So what you are saying is it will not have any impact whatsoever on the NPT and the negotiations over there? Or [inaudible crosstalk] Spokesperson: What will have, not have an impact? Question: …Middle East nuclear-free zone that he has been espousing? Spokesperson: It’s not just the Secretary-General that’s espousing this. This is an agreement that goes back quite some way. And it’s not simply the Secretary-General’s voice on this. That’s the first thing. The second is that the Secretary-General spoke out very clearly yesterday about what’s required of the States parties who are taking part in this Review Conference; that there are people, everybody is watching; the world is watching, and that it’s clear that it’s not easy to reach an agreement. And it’s clear that there are complications that you are alluding to. But that doesn’t mean that the countries who are taking part in this Review Conference shouldn’t focus on making their best effort to reach a deal. That’s what the SG, the Secretary-General, was talking about yesterday. And I think that there is not much more that I can add to that. Further questions? Yes. ==================================== (C) Ms. Catherine Mercier, CBC Radio-Canada, Producer – United Nations. Question: Yesterday the Secretary-General in his press conference mentioned that he wanted to make this building the greenest building possible. I was wondering if there was a clear plan, for instance, regarding the cafeteria, because it seems to me that even now it could be made much greener than it is. Not using disposable cups for instance; there are no real glasses, real cups and many people of course it means like hundreds and hundreds of beverages every day. So is there a clear plan or will there be one? Maybe it’s a question for Mr. [Michael] Adlerstein, but I just wanted to hear you on that. Spokesperson: I’m pretty sure you are right that that is a question for others, not specifically for me. But that doesn’t mean that I can’t find out, try to find out an answer to it. But what’s important here is that the idea of transforming this building into a green building is one that will take some time to realize. We’re not there yet, as everybody knows. In the meantime, measures can always be undertaken to try to improve the environment or impact that everybody here, whoever it is and whatever we’re doing. So there is always room for improvement. So I am sure that folks in the relevant section, the relevant department, can look at measures that could be taken. Okay. ================================= Yes, Matthew. MASOOD HAIDER again Question: I just wanted to find out… Spokesperson: I said Matthew, and then I’ll come to you, Masood, again. Sorry? Matthew Russell Lee: Okay, and then I, you can, then I’ll pass it back to you, Masood. Unless you’re going environmental? Spokesperson: Yeah. Are you going environmental? Are you going green? Masood Haider: Go ahead, Matthew. =============================== (4) MATTHEW R. LEE, of INNER CITY PRESS – The only real investigative reporter at the UN for years. His questions mostly do not get official answers but his postings are most enlightening. Question: Okay. It’s reported that in South Sudan the UN has pulled its staff out of Jonglei state due to unrest. Is that the case, and what can, what does the UN, doesn’t UNMIS [United Nations Mission in the Sudan] have a protection of civilians mandate? I mean, are they, what’s the relation between it being too dangerous for civilians staff, or are military personnel of UNMIS going to this location? Spokesperson: Well, I’ll try to get further guidance on this. We’re aware of the reports and we’ll try to get further guidance. This is always a difficult balancing act here — to get it right, to balance the need to be on the spot, to help the people you are there to help, but at the same time to balance that against your duty of care to the staff you have sent to do that job. So it’s sometimes a dilemma to do that. But that’s as a general principle. I don’t know the full details of this particular case and we’ll try to find out more. =============================== Masood. What’s you question, Masood? Question: Okay. What I am saying is, IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] has now got this thing from Iran. Now, how will that impact the negotiations over here if it keeps a point of report that Iran in fact is on its way to comply, as the Brazilians and the Turkish people, Turkish [inaudible]. How will that impact the negotiations over here? Spokesperson: Well, first of all, as the Secretary-General said yesterday, he spoke to the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. [Yukiya] Amano, and the communication that was received from the Iranians is being analysed and assessed by the International Atomic Energy Agency. So we still don’t know what it said precisely, and we still don’t know precisely what it means. And therefore it’s difficult to assess what impact it might have on Security Council consultations that are going on. I’m sure that members of the Security Council, if you ask them, would have their views on it. The Secretary-General has made clear two things: one, that this is in general in the hands of the Security Council; and the second thing, that the proposal or the deal struck between Iran, Turkey and Brazil would represent a positive step if combined with the full compliance that the international community expects of Iran with existing Security Council resolutions. =============================== Matthew. Question: Sure, on Sudan, I wanted, actually, two questions, both about sort of related to yesterday’s press conference by the Secretary-General. One was this question of both Mr. [Ibrahim] Gambari and Mr. [Haile] Menkerios going to the inauguration of Omer Al-Bashir, given his International Criminal Court indictment. Was there some — and I have gone over the Secretary-General’s answer a number of times — had, did, particularly for Mr. Menkerios, who is solely a UN not AU employee, was this, did the Office of Legal Affairs, who essentially sort of authorized what seems to many to be a change of policy, even going back as far as, I mean, to have UN officials engage with an indicted, someone indicted for crimes of war is something new. And who signed off on that? Spokesperson: It’s just not true that it’s new. It’s just not true. The point is that both these gentlemen, Mr. Gambari and Mr. Menkerios, are appointed by the Secretary-General under a Security Council mandate to carry out a job in Sudan — in the case of Mr. Gambari jointly under the African Union, as you pointed out. Their job is to interact with the Sudanese Government. That’s their job, to ensure that the missions, the important missions, the large missions trying to do the work that you mentioned in the previous question; they interact. That’s obvious. And as the Secretary-General said yesterday, this is no more, no less than their participation in an event that carries political significance as well as being a ceremony. It has political significance, but crucially, they have a mandate to be there and to interact with the Sudanese authorities. Question: [inaudible] keep contact at the high level such as the Secretary-General, I would assume Mr. Menkerios to a minimum necessary to carry out the operational functions, because, I mean, Human Rights Watch has said this is legitimizing, or really, minim… making a mockery of the fact that if somebody is indicted for war crimes and yet can meet openly and be celebrated by UN officials. Is that, what’s the Secretary-General’s response to that? Spokesperson: Well, first of all, Human Rights Watch are entitled to their view, and they do extraordinary work. The second thing is they have a job to do, large missions to run. They need to be able to interact with the Sudanese authorities and they have a mandate to do so. Question: To follow up on that, you say there is no change in policy, but were there any precedents before of such top-level UN officials coming close to someone who was indicted by the ICC? Spokesperson: Of course, when it’s been operationally necessary with President Bashir, that’s the case. But when it’s been necessary for the operational reasons that we’ve talked about here before. Yeah. Question: [inaudible] Spokesperson: I don’t think I need to repeat again — I already did once — I don’t think I need to repeat again what the Secretary-General said yesterday. Okay. Other questions? Question: I have a follow-up? Spokesperson: Yeah. ============================= Laolu Akande joins the question about Sudan - Question: I’m sure you know that it’s a rather tough issue, but we have to ask the question. Do you think by allowing those two top UN officials to go and be part of that inauguration, simple question, do you think that undermines the work of the Tribunal? Spokesperson: Absolutely not. No. The fact is Mr. Bashir was elected by the Sudanese people as the President in the recent elections. That’s a fact. And there is an inauguration. That’s also a fact. It’s a political event as well as a ceremony. It involves the swearing-in, the inauguration of the Head of State of that country where we have two sizeable missions, with people doing difficult work to help the people of Sudan. And that’s the reason why they are there, and that’s the reasons why the need to interact with the Sudanese authorities. =========================
Matthew Lee about Sri Lanka - Question: Last Monday, about eight days ago, when this International Crisis Group report came out about Sri Lanka, you’d said that the UN would study it and would have some response to the report, particularly to the part that said, that called for an investigation of the UN’s own actions pulling out of Kilinochi, ineffectively calling for a ceasefire and funding internment camps. Is that response, is, when can we expect the responses, particularly the factual ones of just how much money was spent on the camps. Is that ready? Spokesperson: Not yet. Question: [inaudible] I wanted to, maybe, this goes back to yesterday’s press conference by the Secretary-General. I was, I’m still trying to understand, I sort of recited the, this, the critique of the ICG. And he seemed to say, I totally reject it. That… Spokesperson: No, I think, Matthew, that’s wrong. What he was rejecting was the catalogue of allegations that you listed that were not in the ICG report. Question: There was only one that was additional. So that’s the one that he… he was only rejecting that one? Spokesperson: Go through the list and maybe you will see what I mean. Question: But I want to, I am going to ask you about that allegation, because I want to know what he rejects about it. Philip Alston has said that a number of LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] leaders who were, came out to surrender after having spoken with Vijay Nambiar, the Chief of Staff, were in fact — he believes, Alston believes — summarily executed by the Sri Lankan Government. So the question is, and it’s a question that Alston himself has raised, at least in the corridors, what was Chief of Staff Vijay Nambiar’s role in encouraging them to come out? No, I don’t know what the role was, but it seems like it’s a fair question to say should there be an investigation to find out whether the Chief of Staff either, you know, God forbid, knew they would be killed or had reason to not tell them to come out if in fact they were killed. So, what’s he rejecting about that, I guess, that’s the factual question? And what’s the answer? What did Vijay Nambiar know when he told them to come out? Spokesperson: The Chef de Cabinet { Mr. Vijay Nambiar from India }has talked about this publicly and made clear that this was, that he had no direct contact with the people who were being asked to surrender. He had no direct contact with them. He spoke to the Sri Lankan leaders and was conveying a message that was relayed to him not by someone from the Tamil community. I will be able to give you the exact ins and outs if you need it, but he has spoken publicly about it. Correspondent: [inaudible] I really try to cover it very closely. I’m not, I’m not… Spokesperson: Yes, yes he has. He did so quite recently in an interview with Al Jazeera. Question: Can we get, I guess…? Spokesperson: Well, you can ask Al Jazeera. Question: Maybe, get, I mean…? Spokesperson: Have a look at what he said on Al Jazeera. That’s probably not a bad idea. Correspondent: Actually, Al Jazeera is no longer shown in the UN. It used to be on UNTV, but that’s not… Spokesperson: Now look, let’s not go down this road. Correspondent: No, I understand, but… Spokesperson: Do you know at the moment I can’t see any TV channels at the moment, Matthew? In my office I can’t see any TV channels because of the technical work that’s going on in the building. There are difficulties. So we don’t need to go down that route. Question: Can I get a transcript of what he said? I am assuming that the UN kept a transcript? Spokesperson: Just watch Al Jazeera, okay? You can ask them, I’m sure they can help you. Spokesperson: Other questions? No? Okay. All right, we have our guests waiting for us. Thank you very much. * *** ============================= So what we just witnessed was that one investigative reporter (Matthew Lee) wanted to know about steps the UN has taken in Sudan and Sri Lanka. In the case of Sudan the UN sent two high officials to participate at the reinauguration of President Bashir who has been indicted by the International Criminal Court of war crimes. It seems that if needed the UN has to deal with Bashir, on a de facto basis – but by going to his party – this is nothing less then an acceptance de jure of his stolen election and a slap at the judges of the ICC. In the case of Sri Lanka, the question is if the Chef de Cabinet to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was involved in delivering rebels to be executed by the government. If you do not ask these questions you will never know that it is difficult to get straigt answers – and only one journalist at the UN bothers looking for answers – seemingly most others are Press-Release mincers while doing that work in their UN cubicles. A second active person clearly came there to look for loopholes to attack Israel. That is clearly his right but it reflects on the UN. A third active Journalist was there because he gathers information on how to better Africa. This is Laudatory. The Fourth Journalist, the lady from Canada, Catherine Mercier, was gratifying to us – she actually tried to find out if the UN is serious about its professed intent of appearing green – and the truth is indeed very far from the UN stated goals. In all these last, nearly 20 years since the Rio Conference of 1992, and the call for an Agenda 21, the UN has done in its own buildings absolutely zero. =========================== Further, in 2006 the UN used to show these Noon Briefings to the Press on Manhattan Chanel 78 on New York TV. That used to be an inducement to get into the Briefing room many more journalists. Mid – 2007 this was discontinued and when I asked about it from journalists and DPI members no-body knew of any other venue. Now, in this tour, I learned from the lady that spoke on UN Media Resources that the UNTV is being seen in Manhattan on Chanel # 150 on Time Warner Cable and it includes the Noon Briefings. With this knowledge I followed up by watching the programs on this Thursday May 27th, and Friday May 28th. I was curious to follow up and see who, and how many of the Journalists show up and are active at Question time. So, for Thursday May 27, 2010: - There was a journalist from the Republic of Korea who had many questions relating to the Korea situation. He was told that the Secretary-General said that he expects the Security Council to take action to which there was an expression of wonder about the idea of a UNSG telling the Security Council what to do. - Masood Haider was asking on the situation in Gaza at the time that in Istanbul there is an attempt to restart the proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians. The answer was that any action that can increase tension while the proximity talks wer started have to be watched very carefully. - Masood was joined by a correspondent from Lebanon who wanted to know about Israeli actions in Lebanon. - Matthew Lee implied that the UN must have safeguards to guard it from itself as per a complaint from a member of the Somali delegation who complained about UN spending funds in Mogadishu. Same goes for the EU. Matthew Lee had specific questions regarding a Sierra Leone UN paid person who declared he will run for elections in Sierra Leone while on UN pay. Thw answer was tat such a thing is clearly not right. The question was specific but the answer was generic. Matthew continued with questions about the Security Council discussing the renaming of the mission to Congo – what are the priorities? He was answered that on Friday he will have a chance to ask the question from the guest. - Matthew continue with questions about payments to a UN official in Congo who is under scrutiny. We had thus again just 4 people – Masood and Matthew and two new participants. One that was seemingly on the Masood team, and a new face interested in Korea. ————– For Friday May 28, 2010: Today there were only questions from Masood and Matthew. The topic for Masood was the Rio meeting of the Alliance of Civilizations under the chairmanship of President Lula, and with the Participation of UNSG Ban Ki-moon. Also about the bombing in Lahore. Matthew’s questions dealt with the UN in Congo.
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 22nd, 2010 Will UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon succeed in shouldering over to Turkey all the World’s problems with Islamic countries? Today’s effort covers Somalia. UN DAILY NEWS from the UNITED NATIONS NEWS SERVICE. BAN ARRIVES IN TURKEY TO ATTEND INTERNATIONAL SUMMIT ON SOMALIA Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon arrived today in Turkey to take part in a major international conference in Istanbul on bolstering the fragile peace process in Somalia. The gathering – co-hosted by the United Nations and the Turkish Government – seeks to help consolidate political stability, security and reconstruction in the conflict-ravaged Horn of Africa nation, which has not had a functioning central government in two decades. The Horn of Africa nation continues to be plagued by fighting between Government forces and its supporters and Islamist rebels, as well as by drought, poverty, food insecurity and heavy flooding. It remains the scene of one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, with 1.4 million internally displaced persons (IDPs), some 575,000 refugees and nearly 3 million people dependent on aid, out of a total population of nearly 8 million. Participants at the international conference, which kicks off tomorrow, will also explore ways to combat rampant piracy off the Somali coast. The Secretary-General today held talks with President Abdullah Gul, discussing a host of issues, including Somalia, Cyprus, the Middle East and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), eight anti-poverty targets with a 2015 deadline. Iran’s nuclear programme was also a subject of their conversation. Tehran holds that the country’s activities are for peaceful purposes, while some nations contend that they are driven by military ambitions. In 2003 it was discovered that Iran had concealed its nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Last week, Mr. Ban welcomed an initiative by Turkey and Brazil regarding nuclear fuel for an Iranian reactor, underscoring the need for bolstered transparency to help resolve concerns over Tehran’s nuclear programme. Under the agreement brokered by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoðan of Turkey and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil, Iran will ship its low-enriched uranium out of the country in exchange for high-enriched uranium for use at a civilian nuclear research site in Tehran, media reports say. The Secretary-General today commended Mr. Gul for expanding the scope of the country’s foreign policy. Mr. Ban also held talks with Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, and the two men then discussed the situation in Somalia at a dinner with President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, during which the Secretary-General underscored the importance of political stability and effective use of aid from the international community. Earlier in the day, Mr. Ban lauded Turkey’s leadership in world affairs in areas ranging from UN peacekeeping missions to diplomacy. “Leadership comes naturally to Turkey,” he said in an address to Bogazici University earlier today. “For centuries, you have been a bridge among countries and cultures.” But he exhorted the nation to take on a stronger global role through its participation in the so-called Group of 20 (G20) industrialized and developing economies and in the Security Council, where Turkey is currently a member. “Turkey has earned the right to speak out, forcefully, on issues of global importance,” the Secretary-General said. “Let your voice be heard, loud and clear.” He also spotlighted the country’s efforts to foster tolerance and mutual respect, as well as stand up to extremism and intolerance. At the initiative of Turkey and Spain, the Alliance of Civilizations was launched by the UN in 2005 to help overcome prejudices between nations, cultures and religions. “Over the decades, Turkey has built a robust democracy,” Mr. Ban said. “Like other nations, you do not always agree on the next steps,” he added. “The important thing is that the debate goes on with full respect for democratic principles.” Paying tribute to the country’s “remarkable strength and vigour,” the Secretary-General said that “the path you have chosen may not always be easy, but it is the right path.” * * * UN IDENTIFIES MOST PERSISTENT USERS OF CHILD SOLDIERS IN ARMED CONFLICTS The United Nations today for the first time named the military forces and rebel groups that are the most persistent violators of children in armed conflicts, identifying groups in Asia, Africa and Latin America which continue to recruit child soldiers and use them to wage war. The annual report of the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict shows that 16 different armies and insurgent groups – in conflicts ranging from the Philippines and Myanmar to Darfur, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Colombia – have recruited or used child soldiers for at least the past five years. The report also identifies the groups which subjects minors to the most brutal violence, such as killings, maimings, rapes and other sexual assaults. Radhika Coomaraswamy, the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, warned that “we still live in a world with those who would use children as spies, soldiers, and human shields. “The shifting nature of conflict has put many children on the front lines. Too often children become collateral damage during military operations. Every year the release of this report should give us pause. Let us remember that we must protect the most innocent and most vulnerable,” she added. The persistent violators include Abu Sayyaf, the New People’s Army and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), three insurgent groups that are active in the Philippines. Myanmar’s national army, known as Tatmadaw Kyi, and the rebel Karenni Army and Karen National Liberation Army were also identified. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) continue to recruit and use child soldiers in their fight against Government forces and paramilitary groups in the South American country, the report noted. In the DRC, the report named violators on both sides of the conflict still flaring in the east – the national army (known as the FARDC) and the rebel Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP), Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), Nationalist and Integrationalist Front (FNI), the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and various militias that are known as the Mai-Mai. In Sudan, pro-Government militias in Darfur and the southern-based Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) were included in the list, while Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG) was also named. But the report, which has been sent to the Security Council, makes clear that progress has been made with some groups which have recently signed action plans in which they aim to end the recruitment and use of child soldiers. The MILF, the SPLA and the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist have all signed such plans. Burundi has been removed from the annexes to the report following UN verification that all children associated with the National Liberation Forces (FNL) have been reunited with their families and that the group has ceased recruitment. By contrast, some groups have been named for the first time as recruiting or using children in armed conflict. These include the Afghan National Police, the rebel Convention of Patriots for Justice and Peace in the Central African Republic (CAR) and Somalia’s Hizbul Islam militia. Somalia’s Al-Shabaab, an Islamist rebel force, and the TFG both stand accused of killing and maiming children in the Horn of Africa country. Several groups involved in fighting in the eastern DRC were named as being responsible for rapes and other forms of sexual violence against children. They are the FARDC, LRA, FDLR, the Patriotic Resistance Forces in Ituri district (FRPI), the FNI and the Mai-Mai. The report lists several recommendations to the Security Council for consideration, including more vigorous measures against those groups and individuals ——– The United Nations today again appealed to governments worldwide not to forcibly return refugees to Somalia, where tens of thousands of people have been killed and some 2 million displaced by years of fighting, as the situation deteriorates even further in the Horn of Africa country. “Today, we are appealing to all States to uphold their international obligations with regard to non-refoulement,” UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) spokesperson Melissa Fleming told a news briefing in Geneva, citing the principle in international law on protecting people from being returned to places where their lives or freedoms could be in danger. “In recent months there have been incidents of returns . . . These have included a further reported deportation, of over 100 Somalis from Saudi Arabia to Mogadishu [Somalia’s capital] in mid May,” said, noting that inconsistencies in the way that countries deal with people fleeing Somalia were allowing returns to happen and putting lives at risk. Today’s appeal came as a major international conference on Somalia got under way in Istanbul, Turkey. The three-day event is being co-hosted by the UN and the Turkish Government in a bid to consolidate political stability, security and reconstruction in the Horn of Africa country, where the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) is embroiled in a raging conflict with Islamist militants. UNHCR has issued repeated warnings over recent months and on 11 May issued guidelines aimed at strengthening international protection for people fleeing the country, urging countries facing large numbers of arrivals to grant protection to people from southern and central Somalia on a group basis, and to extend complementary forms of international protection where refugee status is not granted. Ms. Fleming said “a consistent international approach” is needed to ensure the international protection needs of refugees from Somalia, where the situation has been worsening for some time, with food aid suspended in January by the UN World Food Programme (WFP) and fighting reported almost daily in Mogadishu. By UNHCR estimates some 1.4 million people are displaced internally and more than 570,000 are refugees in neighbouring and other countries. People being returned risk being sent into a war zone and can therefore be in considerable danger. The principle of no forced return, or non-refoulement, is a central element of international refugee law and UNHCR believes no refugee or asylum-seeker in any country should ever be refouled. ——- MIGIRO URGES AFRICA TO FORGE AHEAD WITH PROMOTING GOOD GOVERNANCE, HUMAN RIGHTS. Africa must keep pressing ahead with promoting good governance, respect for human rights and empowering its own people as it seeks to enhance continental integration, Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro said today. It is “clearly understood that Africa’s future is first and foremost for Africans themselves to decide,” she told a conference in Bologna, Italy. Ms. Migiro welcomed a raft of measures the continent has taken, including the Constitutive Act of the African Union (AU) and the body’s clear commitment to upholding basic human rights and democracy, among others. She lauded the “new and emerging African architecture of institutions,” such as the AU Peace and Security Council and AU peacekeeping efforts in Somalia and the joint AU-United Nations peacekeeping operation in the war-wracked Sudanese region of Darfur. Africa, the Deputy Secretary-General said, has also demonstrated its ability to tackle its own challenges through the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), an agreed vision for economic and social development adopted by African leaders in 2001, as well as through the African Peer Review Mechanism System, “a home-grown African effort to consolidate good governance and the rule of law at national and international levels.” She noted that many African nations have undertaken “bold and courageous efforts” to create a better future for their people, with these steps bearing fruit in the form of economic growth, reaching 5 per cent annually for several years until the onset of the global recession. “African countries themselves have been the first to acknowledge that in an era of globalization… their individual efforts will accomplish only limited results unless African countries come together to achieve regional integration and exploit economies of scale,” the official said. Recognizing the complexities involved in bringing together dozens of independent nations, the continent has taken a gradual approach towards integration, starting with enhanced collaboration among regional economic commissions. Ultimately, she said, an African Economic Community will emerge from these efforts. “This is Africa’s own vision and we welcome and support it.” Ms. Migiro acknowledged that there are many roadblocks in this quest, “but African leaders are well aware that the ultimate goal of regional integration offers the best opportunity for Africa and its people to fulfil their potential, harness the continent’s vast human and natural wealth, and become a full partner in the global community.” She pointed out that today’s Bologna gathering comes as 17 African nations celebrate the 50th anniversary of independence this year and “at a time when Africa both needs our assistance but is also poised to surprise us with its own accomplishments.” —————————————————— And From Inner City Press on Somalia and the UN: http://www.innercitypress.com/los9somalia052210.html On Somalia, UN Ban’s Ould Abdallah “Takes All the Money,” Bumbles in Politics. By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 22 — At the conference on Somalia in Istanbul, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon read out an unequivocal call for funding and support for that country’s Transitional Federal Government, whose control over a few square blocks of Mogadishu is only maintained by Ugandan and Burundian troops shooting wildly including into civilian areas. What Ban did not mention was even the Somali Parliament’s opposition to UN Special Representative Ahmedou Ould Abdallah, who most recently bumbled by issuing loud support to a move by Somali’s president which was nearly immediately reversed as illegal. The UN often says it will not comment on internal legal matters of sovereign states. But Ould Abdallah is allowed by Ban to do whatever he wants, including having called for a moratorium on media reporting of the killing of civilians by the Ugandan and Burundian troops. Inner City Press has been told by sources in the meeting that when the TFG contingent met with Ban last week, they complained about how Ould Abdallah is taking all the funding, leaving them with nothing. He gets $25 million, they said, while they get less than a million dollars. Ban said he’d never heard of this. Perhaps this explains his Turkey call for more funding to the TFG?
At the UN’s May 18 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban’s spokesman Martin Nesirky: Inner City Press: Yesterday there was a statement put out about the UN – let me see how to put it — backing the President of Somalia’s sacking of the Prime Minister of Somalia. It was put out in your Office that the UN supported the move by the President to fire the Prime Minister. Now the Prime Minister is saying that that was illegal under the Somali Constitution and that the President had no right to do it. What I am wondering is [Ahmedou] Ould-Abdallah essentially taking sides in an internal dispute of Somalia, is it something he did based on legal advice from OLA [Office of Legal Affairs]? Was it his reading — apparently it was — that this was a legal move by the President? And what does the UN say now that many in Somalia dispute the right of the President to make that move? Spokesperson: First of all, Mr. Ould-Abdallah is well briefed — it’s his area of expertise. As you know, he was here and spoke to you last week. He will be present at the conference in Istanbul on Somalia this coming weekend, and I am sure at the latest at that meeting there will be a chance to discuss this particular matter. I do not have any further comments to add to what we have from yesterday. Inner City Press: In the briefing that he gave with Mr. Pascoe, there was this question of 300 parliamentarians saying that Ould-Abdallah should in fact — that the UN should look into his actions there and should fire him — that is what they called for. He was the one that responded, and he said that was just a website. I mean, it’s Associated Press which does have a website. But I wondered, I’d wished Mr. Pascoe — and I guess I am asking you now on behalf of the Secretariat — what is the Secretariat’s response to a host country — 300 parliamentarians of a host country — saying that the SRSG should not be in the job? What is the procedure? I mean, I know that Mr. Pascoe said he is well seasoned or whatever he said, but what is, we often hear that the UN can only do things with the consent of a host country and a host Government, so what is the response to a complaint of the host Government in this case? Spokesperson: As far as I know, there is a difference between the Government and Parliament in a country. Inner City Press: Could it just be the President? As long as President Sharif… I mean, I am just wondering. Spokesperson: I think you know how Parliaments and Governments work. There is a distinction between the two. But what is more important here is that Mr. Ould-Abdallah is the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and, therefore, clearly is there doing that job, not in Somalia itself as you know, posted in Somalia, but covering that topic because the Secretary-General wants him to. But then, the President’s move was reversed as illegal. The BBC cites experts that it undermine the credibility not only of the president but also of the UN. Inner City Press sought comment from Ban’s Spokesperson and Deputy Spokesperson, but none has been received. Rather, just before Ban and his Spokesman Martin Nesirky headed to Istanbul on May 20, Inner City Press asked: Inner City Press: Just one more on Somalia since you’re going to Turkey… Yemen… Spokesperson Nesirky: Yeah, I am just about to run. Inner City Press: Absolutely. Yemen has announced the death penalty against six Somali pirates. Given, you know, the role of the UN and of OLA [Office of Legal Affairs] and Patricia O’Brien and sort of suggesting to Member States how pirates should be addressed, what does the UN, does the UN Secretariat, OLA or Secretary-General, what do they think of these death sentences recently announced in Yemen? Spokesperson: Well, there are two points. You are quite right that this is a topic — not the specific case, but the question of piracy — this is a topic that is clearly part of the agenda at this conference on Somalia in Istanbul on Saturday. The second point is, as you well know, the United Nations speaks out quite clearly on the use of the death penalty, namely that it should not be used. Inner City Press: So, this is the speaking out clearly about these death sentences? Spokesperson: I beg your pardon? Inner City Press: I mean, is this the speaking out clearly about these particular death sentences? Spokesperson: The use of the death penalty anywhere is something that the United Nations would not be in favour of. I am going to hand over now to Mr. Adlerstein with apologies for being slightly late. And also Marie, very kindly, is going to moderate. Okay, thanks very much. Then neither Nesirky or Marie Okabe answered for two days this question: “Now that the President of Somalia has reversed his firing of the Prime Minister after being advised it was illegal, and with the BBC reporting “Analysts say the row has severely weakened the president’s credibility, and the UN’s, which had backed him” (see below) – I want to reiterate my question from Tuesday, now on deadline: was ‘Ould-Abdallah essentially taking sides in an internal dispute of Somalia, is it something he did based on legal advice from OLA [Office of Legal Affairs]? Was it his reading — apparently it was — that this was a legal move by the President? And what does the UN say now’?” If and when an answer is provided to this question, we will publish it. Watch this site. * * *
On Somalia, UN’s Ould Abdullah Dismisses 300 MPs as Web Sites, Hasn’t Read Report By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 12 — The UN’s envoy on Somalia Ahmedou Ould Abdullah, fresh from being denounced and asked to resign by over 300 members of the Somali parliament, dismissed the criticism on Wednesday as being the product of web sites. “I don’t consult web sites, except yours from time to time,” he told Inner City Press. He went on to say that the AP report of 300 MPs was “based on a letter not signed.” He did not respond to the rejection of the Norway-funded deal he unilaterally made with Kenya, about Somalis’ rights to their shelf continential shelf. As to the criticism that rather than mediating he has taken sides in the Somali conflict, he said “yes I take sides.. for peace, stability, legality, human rights.” Video here, from Minute 21:33. But he has in fact defended violations of human rights by Ugandan and Burundian troops in Mogadishu, who have fired into civilian areas trying to “drain the sea” to get at Islamist rebels. Ould Abdullah earlier called for a moratorium on the reporting of the killing of civilians by AU peacekeepers. Now he says reports by human rights groups are overblown.
Speaking of reports, UK Deputy Permanent Representative Philip Parham told the Security Council on Wednesday that he would “like to register our disappointment that the Secretary-General’s report was issued less than 24 hours before this meeting.” Ould Abdullah claimed that he had only read the first draft of his report, trying to explain why in person he was more dismissive of claims of aid diversion than the report was. What exactly is Ould Abdullah doing? He is a man of action. He does not read UN reports, he does not read web sites (except this one, from time to time). He is not based in Mogadishu but rather Nairobi, Kenya. Soon he will be in Turkey beating the drum for donations. But does he have support in Somalia? Apparently not. What is the UN going to do about this? Watch this site. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 17th, 2010 The different levels of demeaning a woman in the Islamic world: Burqa is a most complete body-cover – the covering of the eyes may or may not be also required. Hijab is a legal term in Islamic law – “curtain” or “cover” that covers everything except face and hands in public. Niqab is just a veil – least offensive. Khimar is a headscarf or veil as mentioned in the Quran. This is the way women should cover themselves as per the Quran. ———————-
ADC (The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee) Congratulates Rima Fakih as Miss USA 2010
Washington, DC | May 17, 2010 | www.adc.org | The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) extends its wholehearted congratulations to Ms. Rima Fakih of Dearborn, Michigan, who was crowned Miss USA 2010 on May 16th at the Planet Hollywood Resort and Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada.
——
You can read more about Ms. Rima Fakih, who is of Lebanese descent, by visiting the links to the following articles:
——
Last night, Rima competed against 50 other contestants, representing all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Rima will go on to compete for the title of Miss Universe this summer. She will spend the next year traveling the globe to promote the Miss Universe organization.
——
ADC President, Ms. Sara Najjar-Wilson, stated that, “we are very proud of Rima Fakih. She is a very intelligent as well as a very beautiful young woman. We are elated by her success, and are confident that she will honor all Americans in representing the United States in the Miss Universe Pageant.”
——
Rima, who is 24-years old, is a graduate of the University of Michigan-Dearborn, earning a degree in Economics and Business Management. She began competing in beauty pageants while in college, as a way to earn scholarship money. After her reign, Rima aspires to attend law school.
——
ADC wishes Rima much success and happiness as Miss USA, and extends to her continued best wishes in all her future endeavors. (so does our website - www.SustainabiliTank.info)
——————————
Contact: media@adc.org
202-244-2990
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), is non-profit and non-sectarian and is the largest Arab-American civil rights organization in the United States. It was founded in 1980 by former Senator James Abourezk to protect the civil rights of people of Arab descent in the United States, and to promote the cultural heritage of Arabs.
——-
ADC has 38 chapters nationwide, including chapters in every major city in the country, and members in all 50 states.
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 13th, 2010 From the UN information of May 12, 2010 that does not mention that Turkey is now leading the OIC and as such is trying to replace the ineffective Arab League. To us, we long argued that Turkey is much better positioned as leader of its neighboring Islamic World then in its futile attempt of chasing after acceptance to the unintegrated Europe, we see in the following material proof that Turkey may finally be finding its correct location on the globe. ——————— SOMALIA: UN LOOKS TO ISTANBUL FORUM AS KEY STEP TO AID WAR-TORN NATION On the eve of a major global conference on Somalia, the top United Nations envoy in the war-torn nation urged the world community to provide the needed resources on the military, political and humanitarian fronts now to prevent an even worse scenario from arising. “If we do not make the right commitments and take the right action in Somalia now, the situation will, sooner or later, force us to act and at a much higher price,” Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah told the Security Council. Speaking on the same day that the UN refugee agency called for stepped-up funding to help the hundreds of thousands of people displaced by the fighting in what he called a “horrendous” humanitarian situation, Mr. Ould-Abdallah praised next week’s conference in Istanbul as “an exceptional opportunity to show that Somalia has true friends ready to make a difference… “This conference is first and foremost a show of political solidarity with the Somali people who have suffered so much and been taken hostage by various groups and individuals,” the envoy said, referring to the gathering to be convened by the Turkish Government and Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on 22 May. “It is also a sign of hope sent to Somalis that they are not alone. In addition to addressing security issues and global threats including piracy, the conference will also provide a platform for the Somali private sector, international business and Governments to launch new initiatives for reconstruction and job creation.” Despite suggestions that it is either too early or too late for such a high level meeting, “we should all recognize that, after years of anarchy, there will never be a right time in Somalia. We have to act, and to act now,” he added of a country that has had no central government and has been torn by factional conflict for nearly two decades. The top UN political official also stressed the importance of the Istanbul meeting today. “We would not at any time, of course, underestimate the difficulties and the fragility of Somalia but we do believe that progress has been and can be built upon,” Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs B. Lynn Pascoe told a news conference. He cited the survival of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) against numerous attacks, its first steps towards developing its own police and security forces, and the interest it has aroused in the Somali business community and in bringing back investment to the country. “This effort has to succeed but is clearly going to require determined, sustained efforts by both the Somalis and the international community to make it happen,” he said. “This is where the Istanbul conference fits in. It will give an opportunity to look at how far we’ve come and what still needs to be done. It should help us increase international awareness of what’s at stake in Somalia and increase international commitment to help in a coordinated way. “It should also help focus the attention of the Somalis themselves, including the TFG, on where they need to step up their efforts.” On the military front, Mr. Ould-Abdallah called for a big increase in and help for the African Union peacekeeping mission in Somalia (AMISOM), which now numbers less than 7,000 troops, as it carries out its task of protecting the TFG institutions and assisting the needy in the face of violent attacks from Islamic militants. At the same time, the international community should provide equipment and salaries for the TFG’s own nascent forces. In the political field, he urged the TFG to show unity and a common purpose, calling on the international community to fulfil its commitments, especially by disbursing pledged resources. He noted that the TFG had succeeded in reaching out to other groups committed to peace, signing an accord with Ahlu Sunna Wal Jamaa, a key religious and resistance movement, which could provide a blueprint for future agreements. “I would like to reiterate that the door of peace is open to all Somalis wishing to end the agony of their country,” stressed Mr. Ould-Abdallah, who serves as the Secretary-General’s Special Representative and head of the UN Political Office for Somalia (UNPOS). On the humanitarian front, where the situation “remains horrendous” despite the laudable work of the World Food Programme (WFP), the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and other agencies, he called for full cooperation between Governments, development agencies, business associations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), urging the agencies to again show a physical presence in the violence-shattered land. “If we want to make a decisive difference, there is no alternative to moving the international community to Mogadishu to be closer to the victims,” he stressed. “The remote control from Nairobi (capital of neighbouring Kenya) is not leading to progress.” Once this close collaboration is established, it can lead to a major move away from past practices of managing the status quo. “In that context, the Istanbul conference comes at the right time,” Mr. Ould-Abdallah declared. “It shows the Somalis and their leaders that there are personalities, countries and organizations that are genuinely ready and committed to working with them for peace and stability.” In Geneva today, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) launched two supplementary appeals totalling $60 million for the nearly 2 million Somalis displaced both inside and outside their country, bringing its total budget for 2010 for Somalia and its four neighbouring countries – Kenya, Yemen, Ethiopia and Djibouti – to nearly $425 million. “The displacement crisis is worsening with the deterioration of the situation inside Somalia and we need to prepare fast for new and possibly large-scale displacement,” Deputy High Commissioner Alexander Aleinikoff said. “We need to be ready.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 6th, 2010
UN DAILY NEWS from the IN SOLEMN SESSION UN MARKS 65TH ANNIVERSARY OF END OF SECOND WORLD WAR The United Nations today marked the 65th anniversary of the end of the Second World War by paying homage to the “extraordinary bravery” of those who waged the “epic struggle for freedom and liberation” and vowing to banish the prospect of a repeat of such a scourge. “It is fitting, today, that we commemorate the war’s end at a moment when nations are gathered to advance the cause of peace,” Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told a commemorative special session of the General Assembly, citing the five-yearly review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) currently under way. “The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is also a document of hope, a vision for a nuclear-weapon-free world,” he said. “Thank you for helping us to remember the past, so that we may better shape our future.” In his address to the Assembly, he recited a litany of major battles, horrors and terrible costs of the war. “The names and places resonate, despite the passing of many years – Stalingrad and Kursk, Auschwitz and Dachau (death camps), D-Day and the final battle for Berlin,” he said. “Its cost was beyond calculation, beyond comprehension ¬– 40 million civilians dead, 20 million soldiers, nearly half of those in the Soviet Union alone. Those were years of unspeakable atrocities, of lost faith and lost humanity. Those years saw extraordinary bravery, as well. World War II was one of the most epic struggles for freedom and liberation in history. And in the end, idealism had its triumph, too.” He stressed that the end of the war coincided with the San Francisco conference that established the UN “an organization founded on that most human of hopes, an end to the ‘scourge of war’.” “As we celebrate the end of one of the deadliest conflicts in human history, we also reflect on the immeasurable human cost of war,” he added. “Collectively, and with the needed political will, we can reinforce international peace and security around the globe, and ensure a better future for the coming generations… “The international community has strived to achieve progress towards reconciliation, cooperation and the promotion of democratic values, human rights and fundamental freedoms. We must renew this commitment. We must continue our path towards a world that reigns with peace, security and prosperity for all. Today’s meeting is an excellent opportunity to renew our resolve to achieve this goal.” ================= Also today:
UN Watch Fights Libyan Bid for Seat on UN Human Rights Council.E-Campaign to Stop Qaddafi: Click Here to Take ActionNew York, May 6, 2010 — Pro-democracy group UN Watch launched a worldwide campaign to block Libyan dictator Moammar Qaddafi from winning a seat in next week’s elections to the UN Human Rights Council, with a mass email petition, a YouTube video appeal, and the presentation this week of Libyan victim testimony at a special briefing for diplomats and reporters at UN Headquarters, co-organized by UN Watch and Freedom House. The two human rights groups also presented a new report rating the qualifications of Libya and the other 13 country candidates. The event was attended by journalists from Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, CBS News, Radio Free Europe, and other major media organizations, and has already led to a dedicated editorial in today’s New York Daily News. See below. “Freedom House and UN Watch urge all UN General Assembly members not to write in the name of Libya or other unqualified states when filling out the four African slots on their secret ballot,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch. “They should instead write in the names of African countries with far greater qualifications.” According to the report, of the 14 candidates announced to date, only 5 are considered to be “qualified” to serve on the Council, including Poland, Spain, Switzerland, Guatemala and Maldives. Additionally, 4 candidates are identified as having “questionable” records, including Moldova, Ecuador, Uganda and Thailand. To view a PDF copy of the report, click here. —————— The following editorial in today’s New York Daily News is based on the media briefing organized by UN Watch and Freedom House, including UN Watch’s presentation of how the UNHRC has turned a blind eye this year to well-documented killings and other mass abuses in Iran, China and Sri Lanka.
May 6th 2010 How dare the UN let Libya sit in judgment on human rights? By James Kirchick The 58-year-old political dissident had been tortured and imprisoned by the regime of Moammar Khadafy, the pockmarked military leader who has ruled the country for more than 40 years. Arrested in 2002 for the crime of advocating democracy, Eljahmi was placed in solitary confinement and denied medical treatment. Briefly released in 2004 after personal intervention from then-Sen. Joe Biden, he was imprisoned two weeks later after meeting with a small delegation from the U.S. Embassy. Libyan officials eventually let Eljahmi receive medical treatment in Jordan, but by then it was too late. Contrast Eljahmi’s funereal repatriation with that of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the former Libyan intelligence officer imprisoned for his role in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 270 people when it exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. Last August, Megrahi was released by the Scottish government on “compassion grounds” after a dubious doctor’s report found that he had terminal prostate cancer. He returned to Libya on Khadafy’s private jet and was met at the airport by cheering crowds waving Libyan flags. Seven months later, Megrahi is living in a luxurious villa, his once-terminal health status suddenly no longer dire. This sickening comparison tells you pretty much everything you need to know about the men running the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, as the country is officially called. I can’t claim credit for conjuring it up; it was Eljahmi’s younger brother Mohammed, a software designer living in Boston, who called the attention of a small audience to it Tuesday at the United Nations, [organized by UN Watch and Freedom House]. He was there to protest the imminent decision by the world body to award a coveted seat on the organization’s Human Rights Council to – you guessed it – Libya. Next week, the General Assembly will vote to fill 14 of the 47 seats on the council as part of an annual rotation; joining Libya as candidates are fellow human rights abusers Angola, Malaysia, Mauritania and Qatar. Widely hailed after surrendering its nuclear weapons program in the spring of 2003 – a decision that probably had something to do with the forcible disarmament of a nearby dictatorship just months earlier – Libya remains one of the world’s most illiberal regimes. “At a time when the ranks of African democracies are growing, it sends a terrible message to the world that a notorious human rights abuser such as Libya appears uncontested on the ballot,” says Thomas Melia, deputy executive director of Freedom House. His organization gave Libya the worst possible score of 7 on its annual survey, “Freedom in the World,” making it one of the nine most repressive countries on Earth. Political organizing is banned. There are no independent media. The government operates the country’s sole Internet server. To ask that Libya and other dictatorships be barred from serving on a body ostensibly committed to the promotion of human rights is not to insist upon some impossible, mythical paradigm for the United Nations. To do so merely holds the organization to its own standards. According to the 2006 resolution founding the Human Rights Council, member states must “take into account the candidates’ contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges and commitments made hereto.” By allowing a country that routinely jails political dissidents and that has no free press onto the body charged with discouraging such abuses, the UN renders its lofty principles meaningless. The farce now playing out in Turtle Bay is indicative of the larger problem with the Human Rights Council. The body was intended to be an improvement upon its predecessor, the Commission on Human Rights, which was scrapped after Western countries accused it of being a propaganda tool of the world’s worst human rights abusers; case in point, Libya was appointed head of the body in 2003. But it appears that the changes have been in name only. The council, not unlike the commission, has completely ignored any and all abuses in China, the world’s most populous country and an authoritarian dictatorship. Nor has it condemned the regime in Cuba, which has increased its repression in spite of overtures from Washington. Too busy heaping scorn on the United States and Israel, the Human Rights Council hasn’t bothered to as much as appoint a special rapporteur to monitor the postelection crackdown in Iran. Should Khadafy’s Libya proceed to earn a place on the Human Rights Council next week, as is increasingly likely, we will once again be left with the sad spectacle of the fox guarding the international henhouse. It speaks volumes about the integrity of the “international community” that it would choose a terrorist-celebrating murderer to sit in judgment of the world’s democracies. “Everyone at the State Department kept telling me that Libya has changed,” Mohammed Eljahmi said in 2006, while his brother was languishing in a Libyan jail cell. “Libya has not changed.” Four years later, Libya still hasn’t changed. And neither, apparently, has the United Nations. Kirchick is a writer at large with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and a contributing editor to The New Republic. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 21st, 2010 We posted this first February 10, 2010, but felt compelled to pick up the subject of the meeting when we saw This Friday and this Saturday/Sunday Financial Times having in both issues a full spread by OIC on “The International Donors’ Conference For The Development & construction of Darfur” (The small “c” for construction is the way they said it.) It says that the conference aims at mobilizing donations for and investments in the following sectors: - Water -Health & Education - Agriculture, Livestock & Forests - Rural & Women’s Development & Capacity Building - Housing and Physical Planning - The Cement Industry & Agricultural Process a conference website - www.OIC-OCI.org
The page is adorned with the flags of SUDAN, SAUDI ARABIA, TURKEY, EGYPT. Though we were very positive about our first posting, this addition is rather approached by us as skeptics. WHY DID THEY HAVE TO WASTE MONEY FOR THESE ADDS IN THE FINANCIAL TIMES? I thought that finally the Arab world has seen that they must intervene in Sudan as a matter of Arab or even better – Islamic – pride. It was obvious to us that the funding and work will have to be sort in the family. After all, does OIC believe that anyone outside the Arab world will channel through them donations for the poor people of Darfur via Sudanese the Government? Will anyone invest except in drilling for oil and that you do not get via an add in the FT. Further, 30% of the page is a self advertisement of the OIC – “About OIC” – which is good PR but nothing for the Darfurians. On the other hand – weekend The Financial Times (Saturday/Sunday March 20-21. 2010 had in the Life & Arts Section pages 1-2, a large article by Barney Jopson – “The road to independence” that was about South Darfur – “Sudan’s ‘Wild South’ is a country-in-waiting and could become a sovereign state next year, But is this shattered region ready to stand alone?” The truth seems to us that Sudan has so badly mishandled Darfur that in effect it could become next State-in-waiting and the Sudan empire may fall apart. OIC could help sort this out in nice, quiet, discreet diplomacy and by backing the economy first using the oil income of Sudan and investment from other oil funds. ======================================= Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Turkish OIC Secretary General : The Donors Conference for the Development and Reconstruction of Darfur on 21 March. But the OIC Calendar posted in the same posting says: “March 23: OIC Conference for the Development and Reconstruction of Darfur – Cairo, Egypt.” (??) OIC Secretary General Ihsanoglu also expressed his great satisfaction on the visit of H.E. Idriss Deby, the President of Chad, to Sudan and the agreement reached between the two countries to normalize their bilateral relations. Also – OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu expressed his deep disappointment over the announced decision of the appeals chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to direct the pre-trial chamber to decide anew on the charge of genocide against the President of Sudan Omer Hassan Ahmed Al-Bashir. All the above seems to show that the Islamic countries are ready to step into a problem solving mode in Sudan – but will the UN keep its Darfur and South Sudan watchdog positions? White washing Al-Bashir should not be allowed. What was done in Sudan was a series of Government sanctioned crimes. We also said that some of the motivation to those crimes had to do with impacts of climate change – will the oil rich Islamic countries – those countries that got financial advantage by selling the oil to the rest of the world, will they indeed pay their dues in the form of real help to the black people of Darfur – be they Islamic or not? ———– The Secretary General of the OIC Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu discussed with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Egypt Ahmad Aboul Gheit the current arrangements for the organization of the ‘International Donors Conference for the Development and Reconstruction of Darfur’, due to be held in the Egyptian Capital, Cairo, in March 21, 2010. The meeting was at Aboul Gheit’s office in Cairo on 6 February 2010. During the meeting, the two sides discussed the facets of joint cooperation between the OIC and Cairo, and their bilateral relations. The meeting also addressed the ongoing arrangements for the next Islamic Summit Conference, which will be held in Egypt in March 2011, as well as various other issues of mutual interest. The Secretary General had arrived in Cairo on 5 February. During his visit he also met with the Egyptian Minister of Islamic Affairs Mahmoud Himdi Zaqzouq and discussed the existing cooperation between the two parties in many fields. Ihsanoglu said that the Conference, which will be held at the ministerial level, will submit to the donors a number of vital projects in Darfur with the aim of completing the development process, which will strengthen stability in the province. On another level, the Secretary General delivered on February 7, 2010 a lecture on ‘The Future of the Muslim World’ at the International Book Exhibition in Cairo. ————– Turkish Minister of Trade and Industry visits the OIC General Secretariat in Jeddah. A ninety-member Turkish delegation led by the Minister of Trade and Industry of Turkey Dr. Nihat Ergun visited the headquarters of the General Secretariat of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) in Jeddah on 8 February 2010. The Minister, whose delegation comprised industrialists and businessmen from the private and public sectors in Turkey, was received by the Assistant Secretary General for Economic Affairs Ambassador Hameed A. Opeloyeru, and the Director General of the Cabinet and Chief Advisor to the Secretary General Ambassador Sukru Tufan, on behalf of the OIC Secretary General Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu. They exchanged views on how to expand cooperation between the OIC and Turkey in economic sector. The Minister and his accompanying delegation attended a briefing session on expanding intra-OIC cooperation in the fields of trade and industry delivered by Ambassador Opeloyeru. The presentation covered a range of vital issues which included Intra-OIC Trade, Trade Preferential System of OIC, Cotton Rehabilitation Program, Agro-Food Development, Development of OIC Halal Food Standards, Cooperation in Tourism, Banking and Financial Sectors, Transportation and Private Sector initiatives. Minister Ergun for his part stressed that his country will continue to take an active role in the OIC initiatives. He also noted that Turkey will soon finalize the ratification process of the Statute of the Standards and Meteorology Institute for Islamic Countries (SMIIC) which will function under the umbrella of the OIC. ——————– The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations which has membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The Organization is the collective voice of the Muslim world and ensuring to safeguard and protect the nterests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony among various people of the world. The Organization was established upon a decision of the historical summit which took place in Rabat, Kingdom of Morocco on 12th Rajab 1389 Hijra (25 September 1969). The Headquarters of OIC are in Jeddah - http://www.oosterhuis.nl/quickstart/inde… ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 11th, 2010
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 10th, 2010 Fiancé of Neda, Iran’s Slain ‘Angel of Freedom,’ Heading to Geneva Rights Summit.THE UPDATE: www.unwatch.org
02 March 2010Fiancé of Neda, Iran’s Slain ‘Angel of Freedom,’ Heading to Geneva Rights Summit – Caspian Makan to protest Iranian government brutality. GENEVA, March 2, 2010 – One day after Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told the UN in Geneva that President Ahmadinejad’s June election was “an exemplary exhibition of democracy and freedom,” Caspian Makan, the fiancé of slain Iranian icon Neda Agha Soltan, announced today that he will join other world-famous dissidents as a speaker at next Monday’s Geneva Summit for Human Rights, Tolerance and Democracy, co-organized by UN Watch, Freedom House, Ibuka and more than 20 other human rights NGOs. Images of Neda’s bloody killing in June at the hand of the Basij paramilitary force turned an international spotlight on the brutality of the Iranian government crackdown against peaceful protesters. The Tehran regime banned prayers for Neda in the country’s mosques, arresting anyone who held a vigil for her. Mr. Makan was then arrested and detained at Evin Prison in Tehran. He was beaten and pressured to sign a false confession. Since his release, Mr. Makan has been an outspoken dissident for freedom in Iran, spreading Neda’s story and message around the world. The Geneva conference is organized by a global civil society coalition of 25 human rights groups, including Burmese, Tibetan and Zimbabwean organizations (see list below), with support from the Canton of Geneva. The two-day schedule features more than 20 action-oriented presentations and skills-building workshops, with the objective of advancing internet freedom, the struggle of dissidents against state repression, and reform of the 47-nation UN Human Rights Council. Speakers will include former political prisoners from around the world, including Rebiya Kadeer, champion of China’s Uighur minority and Nobel Peace Prize nominee; Nestor Rodriguez Lobaina, Cuban dissident; Bo Kyi, Burmese dissident, winner of the 2008 Human Rights Watch Award; Donghyuk Shin, survivor of North Korean prison camps; and Phuntsok Nyidron, the Buddhist nun from Tibet who served 15 years in jail for recording songs of freedom. The Geneva Summit will also feature eminent governmental and intergovernmental advocates for human rights, including Massouda Jalal, the former Afghan Minister of Women Affairs and first female presidential candidate; MP Irwin Cotler, Canadian human rights hero and former counsel to Nelson Mandela; Italian MP Matteo Mecacci, OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Rapporteur for democracy and human rights; and Jan Pronk, former Special Representative in Sudan of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Last year’s summit, covered by CNN, AP, Reuters, and the Wall Street Journal, brought together former political prisoners Saad Eddin Ibrahim of Egypt, Ahmad Batebi of Iran, José Gabriel Ramón Castillo of Cuba and Soe Aung of Burma, along with many other well-known rights activists and scholars. (See videos at http://genevasummit.org/videos.) Admission to the March 8-9, 2010 conference is free, and the public and media are invited to attend. For accreditation, program and schedule information, please visit http://genevasummit.org/. Visit the site during the conference to follow the live webcast, blog and Twitter feed.
Global Civil Society Coalition Assistance Association for Political Prisoners in Burma Centro para la Apertura y el Desarrollo de América Latina (CADAL) Darfur Peace and Development Center Directorio Democratico Cubano Fondation Genereuse Development Freedom House Freedom Now Genocide Watch Global Zimbabwe Forum Human Rights Activists in Iran Human Rights Without Frontiers Int’l IBUKA Ingénieurs du monde Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children International Federation of Liberal Youth (IFLRY) International Campaign to End Genocide International Association of Genocide Scholars Ligue Internationale Contre le Racisme LiNK Respekt Institut Stop Child Executions Tibetan Women’s Association UN Watch Zimbabwe Advocacy Office ### (CNS News) Boyfriend of Neda, killed protest icon: “Giving Iran Seat on U.N. Rights Council Would Legitimize Its Brutality.”Published by
UN Watch
- at March 11, 2010 in Geneva Summit for Human Rights.
“Giving Iran Seat on U.N. Rights Council Would Legitimize Its Brutality,” Says Boyfriend of Killed Protest Icon Patrick Goodenough
Addressing a gathering of dissidents and human rights advocates in Geneva, Caspian Makan, a photojournalist who fled Iran late last year after being detained for more than 60 days, said Iranian membership in the U.N.’s top human rights body would be a “slap in the face” of other members. It would encourage other countries that have a tendency to flout human rights and undermine the credibility of the U.N. and the council, he said, according to a translation provided by event organizers. “I feel furthermore that if the Iranian regime became a member, that would legitimize the inhuman and cruel acts the regime has perpetuated against its population,” Makan added. “Giving it legitimacy would encourage them to go further still.” The U.N. has confirmed that Iran has submitted in writing its candidacy to become a member of the HRC. On May 13, the General Assembly will vote by secret ballot to fill 14 of the Geneva-based council’s 47 seats. Iran and four other countries – Thailand, Qatar, Malaysia and the Maldives – will compete to fill four available seats set aside for the Asian regional group. Makan was speaking Tuesday at the Geneva Summit for Human Rights, Tolerance and Democracy, a two-day event that brought together some 500 people from more than 60 countries, to discuss issues organizers say are mostly neglected by the HRC. He told the gathering about Neda Agha Soltan, the 26-year old “deep thinker” and “artist at heart” with whom he had fallen in love after meeting her on a trip. Makan, 38, said they had tended in the past not to vote in elections because they were seen as a charade, and taking part would be seen as “participating in the regime to some extent.” But the 2009 election had seemed to offer in the shape of opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi a “lesser evil” for young Iranians who “above all else wanted to get rid of Mr. [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad.” Once it became clear that the election was rigged in favor of the incumbent, he said, Soltan had joined the protests. Makan said that while trying to do his job he was an eyewitness to the violent clampdown by “the mercenaries of the regime” and “saw firsthand that the army of the revolution was shooting and killing the demonstrators from a helicopter.” Four days before she died, he had urged Soltan to keep away from the demonstrations. “She said, ‘You know Caspian, I love you, I love being with you, but what is most important to me is the freedom of our people.” On June 20, Soltan was shot in the chest on a Tehran street, apparently by a Basij militia sniper. Amateur video footage capturing the moments after the shooting was posted online and seen around the world. “We have seen many people who have been wounded and killed, but this struck the world particularly hard,” Makan said of his fiancee’s death. “We were able to see in the footage how good and kind she was and admire her attitude when faced with death, to admire her courage as a symbol of liberty, as she died hoping for a better life for the millions of Iranians who remained behind.” Human rights researchers say at least 40 Iranians died during June and that the number more than doubled in the months that followed. The official figure stands at 44. Last month, Mahmoud Abbaszadeh Meshkini, director-general of Iran’s Interior Ministry – whose functions including policing and overseeing elections – told the HRC that the June 2009 presidential election had been “an exemplary exhibition of democracy and freedom.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 17th, 2010 ———- Forwarded message ———-
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 6th, 2010 from: http://twitter.com/AfghanNews?utm_source… ————— Militarism in Afghanistan is not enough: The U.S. Afghanistan policy needs a revision, given realities on the ground. President Barack Obama’s announcement in December 2009 of the deployment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan has received mixed reactions at home and abroad. Military compulsion on the ground and political expediency at home are apparently in collision; frustration and anger are growing. Allies in the Afghan war such as France, Germany and Australia have reportedly opposed Obama’s announcement. However, the United Kingdom, Poland and Italy promised to send a small number of additional troops. By June 2010, the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan is expected to be 98,000. There were 29,950 U.S. troops in the International Security Assistance Force under NATO command, which has 64,500 troops, most supplied by the NATO member countries. Though Obama had promised “change you can believe in” following his landslide victory in the 2008 presidential election, in the meantime he’s faced criticism for his decision to deploy additional troops to Afghanistan. The president announced that he will begin to withdraw troops in Afghanistan by July 2011 to bring an end to the decade-long war; however, the timeline has not convinced the American people, especially those on the left of the president’s own Democratic Party, who are increasingly demonstrating in front of the White House against the war. Analysts and media in the region of South Asia are also critical of Obama’s new plan. The influential Indian daily The Hindu observes that sending additional troops to Afghanistan may provide “tactical relief to American commanders on the ground;” however, there is no guarantee that this new deployment would bring any “victory against terrorism and extremism.” For this, innovative strategies must be devised. In a Dec. 3, 2009 editorial, The Hindu identified four deficits in America’s war against the Taliban and al-Qaida: the political consideration or attention, military doctrine, Afghan capability and a commitment from Pakistan where both the Taliban and al-Qaida allegedly have bases. Flurries of questions will continue to surround the comprehensiveness of U.S. policy and military actions in Afghanistan in the Asian media. Given the reality on the ground, Pakistan is now in a crisis of sectarian conflict and a rising religious militancy. There is also reported presence of al-Qaida members in its territory; thus, Pakistan’s stability, politics, economy and military power are under great threat, as observes the Bangladeshi newspaper The Daily Ittefaq. Analysts comment that it is likely impossible for the United States to win the war in Afghanistan by merely raising the number of troops. On the contrary, it may prolong the war with serious casualties on both sides. Analysts recommend improving the conditions of the Afghan people by investing in poverty reduction, education and health. But the country has been further devastated by a war that has brought insufferable civilian casualties. Any investment in social sectors would facilitate to decrease the anger of the Afghan people toward the United States. Without this infrastructure, the poverty- and illiteracy-ridden country will not be able to get on its feet. The U.S. policy should also engage resources to other countries in the region where al-Qaida is reportedly trying to spread its “ideology.” The presence of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, natural challenges and displacements all contribute to the people’s vulnerability, which catalyses the spread of ideological organizations like al-Qaida. Reportedly, a swath of religious schools in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh — allegedly beyond the reach of government monitors — are working as bases for the spread of the militaristic, ideological challenge to the West, especially the United States. To offset this trend, governments need to engage civic institutions, but this deserves investment. In the latest development, a London conference on Afghanistan has drafted a recommendation to initiate dialogues between the Afghan government and the Taliban, with an aim to dislodge al-Qaida from the country. The Taliban extremist Islamic group is essentially ideologically distinct from the terrorist al-Qaida and seized power in Afghanistan in 1996. However, the international community must monitor such dialogues to ensure they are strategic and to guard against the Taliban using it as a legitimization and recruitment tool. These dimensions in the Afghanistan conflict make a challenging situation all the more difficult, but for now, the deployment of more troops to the region seems only to increase our dependence on military strategy. What is needed most desperately in the region, however, is stability, investment and infrastructure. ——————— Robert NaimanPolicy Director of Just Foreign Policy Eat Your Spinach: Time for Peace Talks in Afghanistan – What’s Your Reaction: In the last week the New York Times and Inter Press Service have reported that the Obama Administration is having an internal debate on whether to supports talks with senior Afghan Taliban leaders, including Mullah Muhammad Omar, as a means of ending the war in Afghanistan. Senior officials like Vice President Biden are said to be more open to reaching out because they believe it will help shorten the war. Wouldn’t it be remarkable if this remained merely an “internal debate” within the Obama Administration? Wouldn’t you expect that the part of public opinion that wants the war to end would try to intervene in this debate on behalf of talks in order to end the war? As an administration official told the New York Times, “Today, people agree that part of the solution for Afghanistan is going to include an accommodation with the Taliban, even above low- and middle-level fighters.” Now, suppose you tell Mom that you want to have ice cream. And Mom says, you can have ice cream when you’ve eaten your spinach. Wouldn’t you eat your spinach? If you don’t eat your spinach now, you didn’t want ice cream very badly. So if U.S. and British officials say the endgame includes a negotiated political settlement with the Afghan Taliban, and you figure, extrapolating from the last five thousand years of human history, that a negotiated political settlement typically does not just drop down from the sky, but in fact is generally preceded by political negotiations, and you want to end the war as soon as possible, wouldn’t you be clamoring for political negotiations to start as soon as possible? Because the longer political negotiations are delayed, the longer the war will last. If you don’t support political negotiations now, you don’t want to end the war very badly. If you consider peace negotiations with the Afghan Taliban “distasteful,” consider this: every month that the war continues, every month that U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan, is another month in which U.S. soldiers will die horrible deaths, be horribly maimed, and be horribly scarred psychologically, perhaps for life. It’s also another month in which the U.S. military is likely to “accidentally” kill Afghan government soldiers (such episodes “are not uncommon,” the New York Times notes) and kill Afghan civilians, as they have done at least twice in the last week, according to the reporting in the New York Times and the Washington Post. I put the word “accidentally” in quotation marks, not of course because I believe that the U.S. military is killing Afghan soldiers and Afghan civilians “on purpose,” but because when you repeatedly take an action (continuing the war) that leads to a predictable result (killing Afghan government soldiers and civilians) you lose the exoneration otherwise conferred by the word “accidentally.” Is this not also “distasteful”? Is killing innocent people not more “distasteful” than peace talks? Gareth Porter, writing for Inter Press Service, reports that an official of the Western military coalition says there has been a debate among U.S. officials about “the terms on which the Taliban will become part of the political fabric.” The debate is not on whether the Taliban movement will be participating in the Afghan political system, Porter reports, but on whether or not the administration could accept the participation of Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar in the political future of Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban has insisted in published statements that it will not participate in peace talks that would not result in the withdrawal of foreign troops, Porter notes. That raises the question of whether the administration would be willing to discuss the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan as part of a negotiated settlement to the conflict. The Obama Administration has stated publicly that it has no long-term interest in maintaining U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Therefore, should not the U.S. be willing to agree to a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops as part of a negotiated settlement? We’re leaving anyway, according to U.S. officials – what’s holding us back from agreeing, as part of a negotiation, to do what we plan to do anyway? U.S. officials have said that the war is all about the relationship between the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda. When the Afghan Taliban breaks with al Qaeda the war is over, say these officials. Some say that Mullah Omar is ready to break with al Qaeda, including the Pakistani intelligence officer who trained him; while Osama bin Laden’s son Omar says Al Qaeda and the Taliban are only “allies of convenience.” Why wouldn’t we put these propositions to the test through negotiations? If you think, for the sake of peace, the United States should be willing to agree to do on a timetable that which it claims it intends to do anyway, tell President Obama. Follow Robert Naiman on Twitter: www.twitter.com —————– Lesson from Somalia echoes in Afghanistan |Published: Thursday, February 4, 2010 Last Thursday, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown hosted a conference in London regarding NATO’s plans in Afghanistan. In attendance were U.S. General Stanley McChrystal, commander of NATO operations in Afghanistan, and Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s special emissary to Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to CTV News, both officials expressed plans to advocate peace and negotiations with Taliban forces. Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s plan of “reconciliation and reintegration” of potential Taliban defectors complements McChrystal and Holbrooke’s strategies. These plans represent a growing trend in emphasizing political action over the use of force to suppress the militant insurgency plaguing Afghanistan. This switch comes nearly nine years after the beginning of the United States’ Operation Enduring Freedom, though it is better late than never. The Taliban was the power in Afghanistan prior to 2001, and their ranks draw from various Pashtun clans. The Pashtun people represent the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and have dominated Afghan politics for centuries. It is therefore the appropriate move to include Taliban members in negotiations and going the step further in allowing their involvement in the new Afghan government. This was one of many lessons taken from U.S. involvement in the United Nations’ intervention in Somalia. The fall of Said Barre’s regime in 1991 created a power vacuum in Somalia that resulted in vicious inter-clan fighting. The collateral damage was devastating to the Somali people, who suffered the conflict and widespread famine. For the U.N., what began as an international effort to deliver humanitarian aid evolved into a struggle to stabilize and democratize Somalia. General Mohamed Farrah Aidid, with the support of members of his clan – the Habr Gidr – and other militant factions, repeatedly assaulted U.S. and U.N. forces to drive them out of Somalia. Many U.S. and U.N. officials wanted Aidid and his supporters marginalized in the new government. Rather than work with the local power, the U.S. wished to create a more ‘ideal’ system that had little focus on clannism. The attempts to remove Aidid’s influence served to unite Somalis against the U.S., culminating in a humiliating retreat from Somalia. The parallels with the situation in Afghanistan are clear. Local power structures, such as clannism in Somalia and Afghanistan, must be considered when creating a functional government. If powerful players are not given incentive to play the game, they won’t have to. Further Recommended Articles: Canada and Germany’s mission in Afghanistan (The Concordian) ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 2nd, 2010 BAN KI-MOON U.N. officials say the proliferation of new initiatives is largely coincidental, the product of months, if not years, of preparation, but that it provides the U.N. with an opportunity to show that it can achieve some diplomatic wins. “There’s no grand strategy here,” said one official. Here’s a survey of key U.N. diplomatic initiatives for 2010 and their prospects for success {cynics at the UN say that this is propelled by the wish to secure a reappointment for a seconf term at the UN - www.SustainabiliTank.info editor}: 2. North Korea. Ban, a former South Korean diplomat, has been seeking a role in the North Korea crisis since he first took office in January 2007. A confidential U.N. policy paper, produced on April 25, 2007, called for “intensifying and expanding engagement” with Pyongyang, and possibly for the appointment a special North Korea coordinator. But initial attempts to start talks faltered after North Korea launched its missile test and detonated its second nuclear explosive last April and May. On Sunday, Ban announced that he would send his top political advisor, B. Lynn Pascoe, a former U.S. diplomat, to Pyongyang to restart high level U.N. talks later this month. He will be joined by Ban’s top Korean aide, Kim Won-soo. Can Ban be far behind? 3. Afghanistan. The U.N.’s outgoing special representative, Kai Eide, held secret talks with members of the Taliban sometime last year. Eide has been pursuing such contacts with the Taliban since he first started his job. U.N. sources described those talks as highly preliminary, and said that they do not have the approval of the Taliban leadership, which claims that its movement is not negotiating with the U.N. But an official close to the talks confirmed that they had in fact taken place and that Eide’s successor, Staffan di Mistura, would likely continue pursuing those contacts. While these discussions offer little hope of providing a breakthrough, they could provide a useful back channel over the long haul. 4. Sudan. The U.N. faces perhaps its greatest diplomatic challenge in Sudan, which is preparing for presidential elections this year and a referendum in 2011 that will determine whether the country remains unified or whether Sudan’s southerners decide to vote for independence. Ban has said Sudan will be one of his top priorities in 2010, and he has just assigned his two top Africa specialists, Ibrahim Gambari and Haile Menkerios, to manage U.N. operations on the ground. Success in Sudan will largely be measured by the U.N.’s ability to stop the referendum from triggering a renewed civil war. “Partitioning the country without violence: that will be a miracle,” said one Security Council diplomat. “I don’t know how they are going to do it.” 5. Burma. U.N. diplomatic efforts in Burma have pretty much run aground. Ban has reassigned his top Burma envoy, Gambari, to Sudan, and made his chief of staff, Vijay Nambiar of India, his temporary point man on Burma. The Burmese military junta recently rebuffed a U.N. request to invite Gambari back to the country for a final visit. U.N. diplomats say that Burma has little interest in meeting with the U.N.’s diplomatic placeholders, particularly now that the Americans are looking to engage the regime directly. ### |



















queue Soupe Harira moderne
The official denial comes after statements published last Saturday by a member of the commission saying that some arrangements required in the conduct of referendum will have to be skipped if the vote was to be held as planned in January.













