|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 27th, 2010 Why the world is not over the moon on Ban.Last updated on: August 20, 2010
T P Sreenivasan, a former Indian ambassador to the United Nations, Vienna [ Images ], identifies the issues that have made UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon such a controversial figure.
India suddenly remembered United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon when an uncharacteristically bold statement about the failed India-Pakistan talks attributed to him was e-mailed by his spokesman. What surprised India [ Images ]n officials was the reference to the ‘composite dialogue,’ which is favoured by Pakistan, while India insists that the priority is dismantling of the terrorist outfits on Pakistan territory. When India took up the matter with Ban’s office, it turned out that Ban had not issued any such statement. The right hand did not know what the left was doing. This was within weeks of a devastating attack on the secretary general by the outgoing chief of the UN’s Oversight (audit and investigation) Division (OIOS), Inga-Britt Ahlenius for undermining her efforts to combat corruption and for leading the global institution into an era of decline. Her 50-page, confidential, end of assignment report, which leaked to the press and published on several Web sites, characterises some of the secretary general’s as ‘not only deplorable, but seriously reprehensible.’ Ban Ki-moon is not credited with either charisma or global vision even by those who are responsible for projecting him in a favourable light. The best they say about him is that he is a man who attends to details and carries out instructions from the Security Council and the General Assembly, ‘a carpenter rather than an architect.’ But the truth of the matter is that his term as the secretary general has been colourless to the extent that member States do not criticise him for any acts of omission or commission. With the major powers resorting to other fora for resolving global issues, the UN itself has become less relevant to the world today. Even before the Ahlenius report came out, it was no secret in New York that Ban depends more on a coterie of Korean advisers than on the established structure of the secretariat for advice and implementation of instructions. Transparency, accountability and reform that Ban had promised on his assumption of office have been absent and a culture of secrecy has been cultivated in his office. The Ahlenius report not only confirms these impressions, but also reveals a bewildering array of actions by Ban’s advisers to weaken institutions, particularly, the OIOS, which was created with an independent mandate to investigate corruption in the UN system. Ahlenius catalogs a number of actions by Ban and his Korean advisers to stifle the OIOS and to deprive it of its integrity and independence. These may perhaps be seen as turf battles, to which departing officials refer in passing when they retire. But the significance of her report is that it points out the larger issues of Ban’s role and the rot that has set in, which she considers difficult to rectify. She believes that the moral authority of the UN is being eroded in the process. The thrust of the report is that Ban has tried relentlessly to take over the OIOS’s investigative functions for fear that an independent unit would bring out embarrassing truths. The secretary general’s office, on the other hand, can resort to selective investigations and take selective action without being accountable to the General Assembly. She expresses frustration over her efforts to appoint a certain individual as the Director of Investigations which met with either objection or silence several times. Ahlenius, a Swedish national and undoubtedly an admirer of Dag Hammarskjold, finds Ban a weak secretary general compared to Hammarskjold and Boutros-Boutros Ghali and points out that a weak SG weakens the system and strengthens the influence of the permanent members. This was to be expected as the P-5 (five permanent members) did not opt for any of the other candidates, who were likely to be strong, independent or innovative. The only SG, who was offered a third term by some of the P-5 was Kurt Waldheim, who was reputed to have had a ‘head waiter’ image. Hammarskjold and Boutros Ghali, on the other hand, did not survive for long at the helm of affairs. Hammarskjold died in suspicious circumstances and Ghali was denied a second term. By not performing the political role of the SG, Ban is playing into the hands of the P-5 and weakening the role of the rest of the membership. Another allegation is that the most senior advisers to the SG, the Under Secretaries General (USGs), have been reduced to a group to take instructions and to implement them rather than to advise the SG before decisions are taken. Their performance is monitored by people junior to them in the SG’s office. No individual meetings are held by the SG with the USGs to discuss and follow up their spheres of activity. This is indeed a sad state of affairs, particularly as most of them are people of his choice, many of whom he had known personally. She also alleges that, despite the air of secrecy, the SG’s office is ‘consumed by leaks’, which must be a matter of satisfaction for those who need to know the facts. Reform of the UN, ranging from administration to the expansion of the Security Council, is something that every SG is committed to. Ban’s government is allergic to the expansion of the permanent membership of the Security Council, but he has stated that he will not be influenced by his national position. But no one expects him to push for expansion. Even on administrative reform, he is said to have a narrow view. ‘We do not do management here and reform, that is done’, according to Won Soo Kim, a confidant of the SG. Ahlenius has more to say about Ban’s management style. Having changed everyone except one from Kofi Annan’s executive office, he seeks comfort in the company of a small group around him. ‘Being surrounded by these staff members, some of whom you knew well even before joining the UN may certainly give you comfort and confidence, but rather of an illusory character’, she tells Ban. Moreover, he lashes out openly against dissenting voices and dares those who do not like his style to leave. He has been giving only one year contracts to most senior colleagues to keep them on tenterhooks and, consequently, loyal. Ahlenius is no ordinary official, who may be motivated by bureaucratic frustrations at the end of her tenure, but a highly respected individual, who is known for fairness and honesty. And that makes her criticism sharp and relevant. She has also had sufficient experience of the UN system to qualify her to comment on the ills of the organisation. The decline to irrelevance of the UN she refers to is not without a sense of its limitations and constraints as a world body. Concern about the SG’s lack of charisma, declining moral authority and ineffective leadership is widely shared in the diplomatic corps and the journalists within the United Nations. Inter Press Service has characterised Ban having been beleaguered by the torrential criticism against him, particularly after the revelations in the Ahlenius report. Now there is documentary evidence of what was merely speculation and rumours. At least one commentator has suggested that Ban should be denied a second term because of the allegations raised against him. But as long as the P-5 are satisfied with his functioning, Ban will continue as the secretary general. South Korea, a country with a sense of determination and pride, will find any suggestion of denial of a second term to Ban extremely offensive. Honour is more valuable than life itself there. The cloud, therefore is likely to clear sooner or later. It suits the P-5 to have a SG who rocks no boats, moves no mountains and confines his domination to his hapless victims in the secretariat. Ban has already defended himself with vigour. ‘If anybody or any member States within the UN system, or if any colleague of mine within the UN Secretariat, accuses me on the issue of accountability or ethics, then that’s something I regard as unfair,’ he said. He added that he had personally ensured both accountability and ‘the highest standards of ethics by the UN’ and made ‘unprecedented progress’ on both fronts.’ India will get to know Ban closely when it enters the Security Council early next year. He has already shown that he does not want confrontation with India and we should be pleased. As we grow stronger, we too will like a weak and inactive UN secretary general. ——————————— ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 24th, 2010 The conclusions to what we ought to do in the present situation that holds no promise for a global agreement on climate change, and for that matter on Sustainability in general, the best we can do is to work on efficiency, sustainable energy and renewables, on a National level – and I would add through mutually beneficial bi-lateral agreements. Eventually, a network of such agreements is then formed, and can become the basis for multi-lateral agreements. This is a realistic common-sense approach. ———————————————————–
You may be interested in a recent paper, International Law and Sustainable Energy: A Portrait of Failure available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1648906 Abstract:
Despite energy’s critical role in achieving nearly sustainable development and in mitigating climate change goal, internationally, sustainable energy remains a homeless orphan. In May 2007, after years of preparatory work that was thought to have produced consensus on fundamental sustainable energy policies and principles, the Commission on Sustainable Development met at CSD-15 to adopt a concrete set of specific policies and actions to make the world’s energy system more sustainable and accessible to the world’s poor. Tragically, the CSD-15 not only failed to produce agreement on any new ideas, but the pre-existing consensus on basic principles dissolved. Internationally, not a single substantive issue left hanging after CSD 15 has been resolved in the CSD or other fora, as high-level meetings, such as the UNFCCC December 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties, continue to avoid concrete discussion about how to shift to a more sustainable, low carbon world economy, international talks increasingly become disconnected from real-world policy, science and law.
In the absence of international agreement, sustainable energy must be pursued through domestic laws that identify and implement policies that promote energy efficiency and renewable energy investment.
Professor David R. Hodas ### | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 20th, 2010 Aid only trickles to Pakistan’s monsoon disaster.By Reza Sayah, CNN
August 18, 2010 Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) — Pakistan is reeling from a natural disaster affecting 20 million people but relief groups say donors have been painfully slow in helping. When a magnitude 7.0 earthquake hit Haiti in January, donors responded with $13 billion in aid. Within 24 hours Hollywood mega-stars like George Clooney, Madonna, Tom Cruise and Beyonce had signed up for a telethon to raise money for Haiti’s quake victims. By contrast nearly three weeks after flood waters inundated one-fifth of Pakistan, the United Nations has collected roughly half of the $460 million it has called for to meet the immediate needs of 20 million flood victims. This week Oscar winner and U.N. goodwill ambassador Angelina Jolie made a high-profile plea to ask the international community to give more aid to Pakistan.
![]()
![]() Pakistan’s flood-affected areas
![]() Pakistan flood: Before and after RELATED TOPICS
“Hopefully there are a lot of people ready to give money,” Jolie told British television network ITN. Aid workers and analysts say there are several possibilities why governments, individual donors and celebrities are not giving to Pakistan the way they’ve done with other disasters. None, they add, is a good excuse. The relatively low death toll — roughly 1,500 killed — may have created the impression that Pakistan’s floods are not as severe as the Haiti quake and the Indian Ocean Tsunami where tens of thousands were instantly killed. U.N. officials say the death toll in Pakistan’s floods belies the desperate and often life-threatening conditions of the 20 million victims. Many of them have lost their homes, their belongings and their sources of income. Analysts say governments may also be suffering from “donor fatigue” with Pakistan. For years now Pakistan has been on a seemingly constant round of donor needs — money to revive its feeble economy, fight the Taliban, recover from the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, the 2009 refugee crisis and now these floods. “A donor never gets fatigued,” Islamabad-based political analyst Mosharraf Zaidi told CNN. “A donor, just as an idea, is not about ‘I’m fresh so I’ll give.’ You don’t give because you’re fresh. You give because of humanity.” There’s also the perception that Pakistan is run by corrupt politicians and the aid won’t get to those who need it. This week Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani insisted all aid would be transparent. Aid professionals say if you don’t trust the Pakistani government, then give to an international aid group you do trust. “There are so many ways people can give that doesn’t have to be rooted in the government if that was a concern,” said OXFAM’s country director in Pakistan, Neva Khan. Aid groups and analysts say the worst excuse not to give is the perception among many in the west that Pakistan is just not a good place, a country full of militants. It’s an image reinforced by the media’s obsession with extremism in Pakistan, says Mosharraf Zaidi. “I think that coverage is fundamentally one of great reasons why it’s been hard for people to reach into their wallet.” The cooling global economy may also have governments and individuals reluctant to give but analysts say the consequences of not giving to Pakistan could be costly. In the short run people will go hungry, suffer from disease, and lose their fight to survive. In the long run a nation that’s critical in the fight against extremism may face a political crisis that could further destabilize the region. ———————— Except for Kuwait and the UAE – the Islamic States are not on the donor list – Why? Is this not Ramadan time – if nothing else? Seemingly, it is all coming from the US, UK, EU, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Switzerland. We find China at less the $2 million – and we learned that Pakistan refused $5 million from India. At the pledging we learned that Georgia is contributing $1oo,ooo and there are small amounts from around the world. All of the above seems strange but clear to us. It is the US that fights to keep Pakistan in one piece as it did in Iraq. Can Pakistan hold when the real enemy is climate change? ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 20th, 2010 These tough days for the US economy – a stand out – New Hampshire Job Growth in Recession.
1.43 % between June 2009 and June 2010, which resulted new 8,900 jobs. ——————————— From the New Hampshire Overview Prepared by: Michael Bergeron, NH Business Development ManagerNew Hampshire Division of Economic Development, August 9, 2010603-271-2591 mbergeron@dred.state.nh.us for:
———————————- •“The magic of New Hampshire: Big enoughto get things done, small enough to reallystand out” Dean Kaman— DEKA R & D
Dean Kamen’s DEKA—Manchester, New Hampshire. { We wrote about the visit at his place in Manchester when we reviewed FIRST and Senator Shaheen’s visit there. New Hampshire cuts through state government red tape so that businesses don’t have to spend time fighting a slow bureaucracy. The contention of New Hampshire business is – Our office provides:
So, What makes New Hampshire
New Hampshire’s state motto: LIVE FREE OR DIE New Hampshire
————- They contend that there are – Two different fundamental government approaches: 1. Give us more of your money and if you fall into a certain class and/or location, we may reimburse or credit you for a period of time, and then we will impose a tax on you so we can offer credits and grants to someone else.
or - 2. You keep more of you money and we keep taxes lower—but that means you also don’t receive a long list of special credits, exemptions, and subsidies—this is what New Hampshire does. ——————————————————————————– Foundational differences: New Hampshire has a Citizens’ legislature New Hampshire does not support professional politicians New Hampshire has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators all of whom get only $100 per year. *No broad base personal income tax *No sales tax *No use tax *No inventory tax *No capital gains tax *No professional service tax *Corp tax: 8.5% of net business income State of New Hampshire Net Income
New Hampshire Tax Details – 8.5% of net business income. Business Profits Tax:
————————————————————- THEY OFFER AN - •Economic Revitalization Tax Credit $200,000 cap over 5 years, 40K per year cap •R & D Tax Credit $50,000 cap each year, 5 year maximum •Job Training Program 50/50 cash match, customized training, no cap New Hampshire ERZ: Economic Revitalization Zone ———————————————————– What is the amount of the tax credit? *$40,000 cap per year, * Capped at $200,000 over five years, with carry over up to 10 years. *Credit against Business Profits or R & D Tax Credit • 10% of the business organization’s qualified manufacturing research and development expenditures (salaries related to new research) up $50,000 tax credit per year. State of New Hampshire Audit Program
————————————————————– NH Job Training Grant Program
• Training can be done at the company or other location. Example of national rankings New Hampshire: 6th highest per capita income in the U.S.-U.S. Census 09 “Most Livable State” in U.S., Morgan Quitno 2003-2008 (4th in 2010) “4nd Healthiest State”, United Health Foundation 09 3nd Lowest crime rate in U.S., Morgan Quitno 09
New Hampshire is the Most Business Friendly State in the Northeast ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 20th, 2010 August 19, 2010, before the UN started its meetings, the Asia Society in New York opened the discussion on the Pakistan Flood response by diving right to the bottom truth – the latest mega-disasters have one common cause – human induced climate change. It was Financier George Soros who injected the topic and the media was allowed by Ambassador Holbrooke to follow up. See what you can do when you go outside the UN! Ambassador Dr. Richard C. Holbrooke, former Chairman of the Board of the Asia Society, and now US Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, chaired the 8:30 am event at his New York home – the Asia Society – on the day when for 3:00 pm the UN General Assembly scheduled a pledging event for funding Pakistan relief. At the UN, for the US, spoke Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton, and I saw on TV the complete Asia Society American team sitting in the hall. The team included also Judith A. McHale, US Department of State Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, Dr. George Erik Rupp, a theologian, President of the International Rescue Committee and former President of Rice University and Columbia University, and Raymond Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America. The opening speaker after Ambassador Holbrooke was Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, and the panel included also USAID Administrator Dr. Rajiv Shah. Then there was a list of guests that made their comments, followed by questions from the floor and answers from Administrator Dr. Shah and Ambassador Qureshi.
enlarge image
L to R: USAID’s Dr. Rajiv Shah, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, and Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke. (Else Ruiz/Asia Society) –
Judith A. McHale, a former media head herself ( President and Chief Executive Officer of Discovery Communications – 1987 to 2006), and now with the US Government, said that information is critical. “We work with the government of Pakistan to provide the critical information on the ground. It is posted on www.State.gov
Among the guests were Financier George Soros, whose Open Society Institute and Soros Foundations work on the ground in Pakistan – he announced that he adds another $5 million to the funds that his foundation will work with in helping directly civil society in Pakistan, Christopher MacCormac of the Asian Development Bank, which is leading the effort to assess the flood damage, said much of the economic infrastructure of the area has been destroyed. 2 million ha. of crops were lost and livestock have been devastated, which has taken a large toll on Pakistan farmers. ADB has said that after the immediate contribution of $3 million from the ASia-Pacific Disaster Fund, it would loan Pakistan $2 billion to help the country rebuild, and Pakistan’s rock star turned political activist Salman Ahmad, known as Pakistan’s Bono, or as Holbrooke pointed out, “Bono is the Irish Salman Ahmad,” pointed out a very important topic: “This is a defining moment in Pakistan,” Ahmad said. “This flood has set back Pakistan in a huge way. Out of 175 million people, 100 million are under 25. Those young people are skeptical, and they feel abandoned by the world. The international community has to win hearts and minds of those 100 million youth in Pakistan.” “If there is a sluggish response the terrorists/extremists win.” He also said that last year he had a concert at the UN to show to the young people in Pakistan that there was hope – he said that he is sure the international community will react positively. Ambassador Holbrooke said that in the catastrophe there is also an opportunity, that we should not miss - the people in Pakistan should see that the world is ready to help. He found that these elements of hope in opportunity were missing in the day’s article in The New York Times. For the US the strategic implications are clear. The US pulled out helicopters from the military effort in order to help in the rescue effort. Will the Taliban take advantage of this? A US transport ship with materials arrived to Karachi, and Japan will now also send helicopters to help in the rescue effort. The meeting was summarized by The Asia Society and there is also the full tape at - Further, Ms. Nafis Sadik from the UN, now a Trustee Emeritus of the Asia Society and Chair of the Pakistan Foundation at the Asia Society called for Ramadan giving to the Foundation. Other Pakistan-Americans spoke and told of their own efforts to raise funds for the Pakistan relief program as the State’s capacity to meet the challenge has been overstretched. Today Pakistan , one fifth of its territory submerged, 68 million of its people affected, and 1,600 people dead, crops, animal stock, and infrastructure devastated – Pakistan is calling – humanity is calling they said. We saw a video proving every point. The Pakistan-American Foundation was inspired by Hilary Clinton’s “Pakistani Peacebuilders.” Oxfam America was joined by “Save the Chidren” NGO representative Gorel Bogarde said the obvious – what children most need is food, clean drinking water and shelter. She is most concerned for the moment about the outbreak of water-bourne diseases, such as cholera. We will not repeat here further figures of loss and the size of the calamity. We assume that these are known by our readers by now – we want rather to point out the blunt comments that resulted from the statement by Mr. Soros who linked what happens to our lack of readiness to do something about the human-made climate change. Pakistan is the biggest of the recent disasters he said and we must deal with the root causes he continued. CLIMATE CHANGE IS THE ROOT CAUSE FOR ALL THESE RECENT DISASTERS. Mr. Soros spoke of the coincidence of the Himalaya glaciers melting and the monsoons getting stronger at the same time. He also said “there is a certain amount of fatigue in responding to these disasters… [but] we have to come to terms with the fact that they are in fact connected, that there is climate change.” At the Q & A part of the program, I asked the last question that was intended to bring the attention back to what Mr. Soros said. Ambassador Holbrooke said Thank You and addressed the question first to Mr. Rajiv Shah. When asked if there was a connection between the floods and climate change, USAID’s Shah said “while it’s very hard to attribute any single event to what we’re doing to our global environment it is very clear that that trend is leading to a greater number of large hurricanes, a greater number of floods, hotter and dryer conditions in places that are dependent on weather and rainfall for agriculture, and it’s making it very difficult for the least resilient, the most lower income communities of the world to survive.” We heard from Mr. Christopher MacCormac that after the Earth Quake of 2005 the rebuilding of houses was done according to higher standards – so what we need here in the response to the present calamity is also to build better – but he did not specify, neither did Mr. Holbrooke. This, with the understanding that the increased monsoon floods, joined with the melting of the Himalaya Glaciers, is indeed not a one time shot – but the beginning of a trend – leaves us with very bad premonitions about the future of Pakistan and other low lying lands of the region. This has clearly left me thinking about what means building better? Are we going to take into account these new phenomena resulting from global use of fossil fuels when going from the immediate reaction to the suffering from the floods to the longer range rebuilding stage? This is clearly an area that will be written up much more in the foreseeable future. Ambassador Qurashi was asked by Mr. Holbrooke to react to the climate change implications. Are there additional run-off from the Himalayas? The answer included: The Glaciers melt and what we have in Pakistan are Monsoon water plus glacier melts combined. We have above normal moisture. He also said that “There are local NGOs in Pakistan that help push back the extremists and you have shown the world that you are a helping Nation.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 17th, 2010 Originally posted August 1, 2010 and updated August 17, 2010. As we intend to be next week in New Hampshire to visit with some Green efforts there, we are now more attentive to that State and I just found the following:
====================================
### | |||||||||||
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 9th, 2010 Sunday, Aug. 8, 2010
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/mail/ed20100808a1.html
Russia’s new war anniversary.Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on July 25 signed into law a bill designating Sept. 2 as “the anniversary of the end of World War II.” The bill had been approved by the State Duma (lower house) on July 8 and by the Federation Council (upper house) on July 14. The law has been interpreted as effectively commemorating the Soviet Union’s victory over Japan on Sept. 2, 1945. Tokyo signed a surrender document on that day aboard the U.S. battleship USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay. As this year is the 65th anniversary of the war’s end, Russia may carry out large-scale celebrations Sept. 2 centering on the Russian Far East. On July 3-4, the Russian military carried out a military exercise involving some 1,500 soldiers and 200 military and special-purpose vehicles on Etorofu Island, the northernmost and biggest of four islands, northeast of Hokkaido, that are claimed by both Japan and Russia. In 1998, then President Boris Yeltsin vetoed a similar bill in consideration of Japan-Russia relations. Mr. Medvedev has taken the opposite tack. Russia apparently aims to justify its effective control of what Japan calls the Northern Territories and check Japan’s attempt to get the four islands back. Japan did not strongly protest the enactment of the law because the phrase “victory over Japan” is not used. Nevertheless, the Kan administration must firmly maintain Japan’s official stand on its sovereignty over the Northern Territories and persevere in trying to break the deadlock over the territorial issue. Japan maintains that the Soviet Union declared war against Japan on Aug. 9, 1945, in violation of the Japan-Soviet neutrality pact, and that its military illegally seized the islands between Aug. 29 and Sept. 9 of that year. Despite the anniversary law, Russia considers economic cooperation with Japan, especially in developing the Russian Far East, indispensable for modernizing the Russian economy, which at present relies mainly on natural resource exports. Japan should make every effort to take advantage of this opportunity to improve its position in the territorial row. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 6th, 2010 UN’s Ban Slammed in Staff Union Resolution, for Lack of Action & Staff Death. By Matthew Russell Lee, an ICP Exclusive.
UNITED NATIONS, August 5 — Open discontent with the UN’s Ban Ki-moon has spread, reflected in a resolution passed on August 5 by the UN Staff Union deploring “the systemic lack of personal accountability and transparency [which] has become more serious since the current Secretary General took office.” The resolution expresses deep concern about Ban’s “apparent lack of interest in seeking a determination of accountability for the numerous deadly incidents involving staff members, including those who died in the terrorist attack on the UN premises in Algiers in 2007 up to the killing of [UN Security officer] Louis Maxwell in Afghanistan in 2009.” As Inner City Press has exclusively reported, despite the finding in a still withheld UN report that Louis Maxwell was murdered by Afghan National Forces, Ban’s top Security official Gregory Starr has said it is hard to push the Afghans to investigate this one death, due to “cultural sensitivity.” The resolution notes the End of Assignment Report of the former head of the Office of Internal Oversight Services Inga Britt Ahlenius, which among other things criticized Ban’s lack of accomplishments in Myanmar and Sudan, and Ban’s losses in and lack of cooperation with the UN Dispute Tribunal, where for example his Under Secretary General Shabaan Shabaan has be ordered to pay a $25,000 fine for misconduct. Unless Ban takes “immediate steps towards real reform,” the Staff Union will consider a “vote of no confidence in the management of the UN and its leadership” in the Fall, the season of the UN General Debate. This comes as countries in the General Assembly move to require Ban to appear before them to seek a second term as Secretary General. In the past weeks, Ban has deployed his Under Secretary General for Management Angela Kane and his chief of staff Vijay Nambiar to defend his performance. In light of the expanded and expanding critique, one expects Ban to personally make his case. He is expected back in New York, and to hold a press conference, on Monday, August 9. —————————————— He is presently in Japan, the first UN Secretary-General to attend the Hiroshima Bomb-Drop Day. Was this related to his attempt to get Japan’s backing at the Security Council in his reelection campaign ? ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 6th, 2010 Friday August 6, 2010 is the day that 65 years ago the US dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and the world changed with a technology on the lose. On my way to meet a UN official on Thursday, August 5th, I was stopped by a Japanese TV crew that wanted to hear one more opinion on how Japan and the US should interact in ways of remembering that day. ————————– Do I know that tomorrow will be 65 years since the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima? Yes I do. What do you think, was it right? In a state of war – this is complicated. I will not take position on that but clearly will take position that it should not be allowed to happen again as today, practically every no-body can get the bomb and threaten the whole world. Should the US apologize? I will not take position on the actual bombing , but clearly there is a place for an apology for the loss of life. You know that for the first time a US official representative is going to the shrine tomorrow? I did not know, but I think this should have been done a long time ago. Do you think President Obama should go to the shrine when he visits Japan? A sure yes, but he does not have to apologize for the bombing itself – only for he loss of life and the destruction, and make sure that he is for stopping this sort of things in he future. ————————-
Picturing the Bomb Archives
Parts of the MARTIN FACKLER article in the New York Times of August 6, 2010
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 An Interesting book by Hannah Pakula on Madame Chiang Kai-shek (May Ling) that reveals the American right of WWII days – the couple Henry and Clare Boothe Luce – the US media owners of those days. They tried to make history like the right wing US media owners try it today.The Last Empress and the Publisher: America and the Birth of Modern China.
The Last Empress by Hannah Pakula.
Authors Hannah Pakula (The Last Empress: Madame Chiang Kai-shek and the Birth of Modern China) and Alan Brinkley (The Publisher: Henry Luce and His American Century) discused the complex ties between American publishing giant Henry Luce and the charismatic Chinese leaders Madame and Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek. “A rare combination of brilliant writing and insightful scholarship, it captures the complexities of an extraordinary woman in a turbulent time, who influenced the course of China’s history in the 20th century.” Was Luce right or wrong to support Chiang Kai-Shek and his wife? EXCERPT: During May 1941, Henry and Clare Boothe Luce paid a thirteen-day visit to China. The son of missionaries, born in Tientsin in 1914, Luce was primed to be impressed with the country and the Chiangs. As one of his writers and old friends put it, “The trouble with Harry is that he’s torn between wanting to be a Chinese missionary like his parents and a Chinese warlord like Chiang Kai-shek.” An ardent political reactionary, Luce had already taken on the Chinese Nationalist cause, spearheading a new organization call United China Relief, which could raise $7 million for aid to China. The Luces stayed with the Kungs in Chungking and had tea with the Chiangs, affording Henry Luce opportunity to declare Chiang Kai-shek “the greatest ruler Asia has seen since Emperor Kang Hsi 250 years ago.” Having heard that Madame’s pantry had been destroyed by a bomb, the guests brought a huge supply of cigarettes, which they presented to the Chiangs along with a portfolio of photographs of their host, his wife, and leaders of KMT. “An hour later we left,” Luce wrote, “knowing that we had made the acquaintance of two people, a man and a woman, who, out of all the millions now living, will be remembered for centuries and centuries.” In August, May-ling wrote Mrs. Luce to thank her “so much for what you and Mr. Luce have done to help China since your return to America. Since you left,” she added, “I have been having malaria and lately dengue fever.” Four months after their trip, Luce devoted most of Fortune magazine to China. “The time has come for Americans to awake to the realization that further appeasement in the Pacific will be just as fatal as appeasement was in Europe,” the magazine announced. The message was timely. The month after the Luce’s visit, on June 22, 1941, Hitler had invaded Russia without warning. Stalin asked the Chinese Communists to go to battle against the Japanese in northern China, thus enabling the Soviets to concentrate on defending European Russia, but Mao refused. … Suddenly, on December 7, 1941, Japan attacked the U.S. Navy at Pearl Harbor, sinking five battleships and three cruisers, and destroying 177 planes. More than 2,000 American sailors were killed, over 1,200 injured, and nearly 900 men were missing. Japan also attacked the British in Hong Kong and Malaya. The next day both the United States and Britain declared war on Japan. China, which had waited for the United States’ declaration, followed suit. No longer alone, Chiang sent the following wire to President Roosevelt: “To our new common battle we offer all we are and all we have, to stand with you until the Pacific and the world are freed from the curse of brute force and endless perfidy.” The wire was clearly written by May-ling. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 Be’chol Lashon is the Hebrew for “In Every Tongue” and it advocates for the Growth & Diversity of the Jewish People. Today Jews come indeed in every color and every stripes and some leaders do the outreach to embrace them all. Just look at Dr. Lewis Gordon of the Center for Afro-Jewish Studies at Temple University in Philadelphia, Mr. Romiel Daniel of Queens, New York, The head of Jews of India in our region, Dr. Ephraim Isaac, of the institute for Semitic Studies. They do not look like your stereotype Jew. I met them and was impressed – the latter actually for the first time as we both visited Addis Ababa at the time of the delayed Ethiopian Millennium. Then Rabbi Hailu Paris with his communities in Brooklyn and the Bronx, Ethiopian born and graduae of Yeshiva University, and his Assistant Monica Wiggan (http://www.blackjews.org/Essays/RabbiParisEthiopianTrip.html), and Rabbi Gershom Sizomu of the Abayudaya Jews of Uganda from whom I got a very distinctive kippah with the menorah – of the old temple worked in. Then Dr. Rabson Wuriga of the Hamisi Lemba clan in South Africa and Zimbabwe and so on – in Nigeria, in Peru, in India, in China. And who has not heard by now of the present White House Rabbi – Cappers Funnye – the cousin of Michelle Obama – and associate director of Bechol Lashon and spiritual leader of Beth Shalom B’nei Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation of Chicago? The New York regional director of DiverseJews.org is Lacey Schwartz who is also National Outreach Director of BecholLashon.org, assisted by Collier Meyerson and to top it all Davi Cheng, Director of the Los Angeles region is Jewish, Chinese, and Lesbian. As I said it is all a new image of the Jew. Last night, at the Gallery Bar, 120 Orchard St., NYC there was a Shemspeed Summer Music Festival event. The two further upcoming events in New York will be on: Monday, August 2nd – the Shemspeed Hip Hop Fest at Le Poisson Rouge – 158 Bleeker Street NYC Featuring Tes Uno, Ted King & guest Geng Grizlee and others with CD Release parties for “A Tribe Called Tes” and “Move On.” Thursday, August 5th – Shemspeed Jewish Punk Fest at Pianos, 158 Ludlow Street, NYC Featuring Moshiach Oil & The Groggers. info on each event above and at http://shemspeed.com/fest —————————————————–
Rethinking How U.S. Jews Fund Communities Around the World.The Forward For more than half a century, North America’s Jewish federation system has divided its overseas allocations between the Jewish Agency for Israel and the American Joint Distribution Committee. The Jewish Agency has been dedicated to building up Israel and encouraging aliyah, while the Joint has focused on aiding Jewish communities in need around the globe. Today, both agencies are working to assert their continued relevance in a changing Jewish world. With aliyah slowing, the Jewish Agency is moving toward embracing a new agenda: promoting the concept of Jewish peoplehood. The JDC, meanwhile, has sought to claim a larger share of the communal pie, which had long been split 75%-25% in the Jewish Agency’s favor. After a recent round of sniping over the funding issue, the two sides are now stepping back from their public confrontation and recommitting to negotiations over the future of the collective funding arrangement. Underlying this fight, however, is a more fundamental tension over communal funding priorities: Should overseas aid be focused on helping needy Jews and assisting communities that have few resources of their own, or should it be used to bolster Jewish identity? With this debate raging, the Forward asked a diverse group of Jewish thinkers and communal activists from around the world to weigh in and address the following question: How should North America’s Jewish community be thinking about its priorities and purposes in funding Jewish needs abroad? New Century, New Priorities By Yossi Beilin During the 20th century, the challenges facing world Jewry were the following: rescue of Jews who encountered existential danger, assistance to Israel, helping with the absorption of those who immigrated to new countries and opening the gates for those who were denied the right to emigrate. In the 21st century, ensuring Jewish continuity is the greatest challenge facing the Jewish people. Yet too often Jewish organizations in the United States and elsewhere remain focused on the challenges of the previous century. (Indeed, Jewish groups were not very receptive when I first proposed the idea for Birthright Israel 17 years ago.) Ensuring the existence of Jewish life (religious and secular) throughout the world via Jewish education, encounters between young Israeli and Diaspora Jews, creating a virtual Jewish community using new technologies — these must be at the top of the global Jewish agenda. This requires American Jewish philanthropy and leadership, which in turn requires discerning between past and present priorities. Yossi Beilin, a former justice minister of Israel, is president of the international consulting firm Beilink. Reviving Polish Jewry By Konstanty Gebert The rebirth of Central European Jewish communities after 1989, though numerically not very impressive, remains significant for moral and historical reasons. It is also crucial for Jewish self-understanding. An enormous proportion of American Jews can trace their origins to what used to be Poland alone. This is where much of Diaspora history happened. Alongside the courage and determination of local Jews, the far-sighted support of several American Jewish organizations and philanthropies made this rebirth possible. In Poland the Joint Distribution Committee, the Ronald S. Lauder Foundation and the Taube Foundation played key roles. Their support has translated not only into Jewish schools and festivals in places once believed to be Jewish-ly dead, but also in most cases into changed relations between local Jewish communities and their fellow citizens as well as clear support for Israel on the part of these countries’ governments. Yet for all this progress, Central European Jewish communities might never become self-financing. The support given them by American Jewry remains a vital Jewish interest. It must be strengthened. Konstanty Gebert, a former underground journalist, is a columnist at the Polish daily Gazeta Wyborcza and founder of the Polish-language Jewish monthly Midrasz. What We Give Ourselves By Lisa Leff More than any Jewish community in history, postwar American Jews have used our prosperity to help Jewish communities around the world. On one level, the greatest beneficiaries of this support have been Jews abroad. But we should also recognize that these philanthropic efforts have shaped our communal values and identity. Through our international aid, we have dedicated ourselves to universalist and cosmopolitan ideas like tikkun olam and solidarity across borders. In helping disadvantaged and oppressed Jews abroad, we have also deepened our community’s commitments to democracy, human rights and economic justice for all. It’s only natural that Jewish groups pitch in on Haitian earthquake relief and advocate on behalf of oppressed people of all backgrounds. Whatever the outcome of the federations’ deliberations over how to divide allocations between the Jewish Agency and the Joint Distribution Committee, it is imperative that American Jewry maintain its commitment to our values through supporting international philanthropy. Lisa Leff is an associate professor of history at American University and the author of “Sacred Bonds of Solidarity: The Rise of Jewish Internationalism in Nineteenth-Century France” (Stanford University Press, 2006). Putting Identity First By Jonathan S. Tobin The choices we face are not between good causes and bad or even indifferent ones but between vital Jewish obligations. But since the decline in giving to Jewish causes means that we must make tough decisions, programs that reinforce Jewish identity and support Zionism both in the Diaspora and in Israel must be accorded a higher priority. At this point in our history, with assimilation thinning the ranks of Diaspora Jewry and with continuity problems arising even in Israel, the need to instill a sense of membership in the Jewish people is an imperative that cannot be pushed aside. Under the current circumstances, absent an effort that will make Jewish and Zionist education the keynote of our communal life, the notion that Jewish philanthropies or support for Israel can be adequately sustained in the future is simply a fantasy. Jonathan S. Tobin is executive editor of Commentary magazine. Collective Responsibility By Richard Wexler One cannot have a meaningful discussion about framing the national Jewish community’s priorities and purposes in funding Jewish needs abroad without first asking the question: Is there actually a collective “North American Jewish community” today? Collective responsibility has been and remains the foundation upon which the federation system and, therefore, the national Jewish community are built. It is what distinguishes the federations from all other charities. It is embodied in our participation in the adventure of building Israel and in meeting overseas needs through the Jewish Agency and the Joint Distribution Committee, in the dues that federations pay to the Jewish Federations of North America and so much more. But today, federations “bowl alone.” Collective responsibility gives meaning to kol Yisrael arevim zeh l’zeh — all Jews are responsible for one another. Until federations understand once again that Jewish needs extend beyond the borders of any one community, we cannot have a meaningful priority-setting process for funding Jewish needs abroad. Richard Wexler is a former chairman of the United Israel Appeal. Originally published here: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/rethinking-how-u-s-jews-fund-communities-around-the-world-1.292527 —————————————————————————–
Gary Tobin’s Legacy Lives on in New Ugandan Health CenterBy Amanda Pazornik The J Weekly
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 United States-India Agreement for Nuclear Cooperation Conclusion of Reprocessing Arrangements and Procedures.Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
July 30, 2010
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns and Indian Ambassador to the United States H.E. Meera Shankar today signed the Arrangements and Procedures Pursuant to Article 6(iii) of the Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy regarding the reprocessing of U.S.-obligated nuclear material in India. Upon entry into force, the Arrangements and Procedures will enable reprocessing by India of United States-obligated nuclear material at a new national reprocessing facility to be established by India dedicated to the reprocessing of safeguarded nuclear material under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. These Arrangements and Procedures will facilitate participation by United States firms in India’s expanding civil nuclear energy sector. This arrangement, negotiated and concluded under President Obama, reflects the Administration’s strong commitment to building successfully on the landmark U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative and is a prerequisite for U.S. nuclear fuel suppliers to conduct business with India. Previously, the United States had extended such reprocessing consent only to the European Union (EURATOM) and Japan. The Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative has facilitated significant new commercial opportunities across India’s multi-billion dollar nuclear energy market, including the designation of two nuclear reactor park sites for U.S. technology in the states of Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat. Increased civil nuclear trade with India will create thousands of new jobs for the U.S. economy while helping India to meet its rising energy needs in an environmentally responsible way by reducing the growth of carbon emissions. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 Media freedom threatened in most European countries, says OSCE“Authorities have yet to understand that media are not their private property,” says the OSCE IN FRANCE IT IS THE PRESIDENT WHO NOMINATES THE HEAD OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING – CLEARLY AN INFRINGEMENT OF THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS NOT UNKNOWN IN TOTALITARIAN STATES. July 30, 2010 - http://euobserver.com/9/30561/?rk=1 EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Media freedom is threatened in most European countries, warns the Organisation for Co-operation and Security in Europe, highlighting incidences in several of its member states including EU countries France, Italy and Greece. In a report published Thursday (29 July), the 56-member OSCE, a loose gathering of states monitoring regional security, says that “freedom of the media concerns arise in most OSCE participating States. They only manifest themselves differently.” The report, published annually, says the “freedom to express ourselves is questioned and challenged from many sides” and the threats manifest themselves through “traditional methods” to silence free speech as well as “new technologies to suppress and restrict the free flow of information and media pluralism.”
The breaches, either existing or potential, to media freedom range from a draft law on electronic surveillance and electronic eavesdropping law in Italy which could “seriously hinder investigative journalism” to a draft law in Estonia that may allow too many exemptions to the right to protect the identity of sources, to the fact that French President Nicolas Sarkozy is head of the public service broadcaster, France Televisions. “The presidential nomination of the head of a country’s public service broadcaster is an obstacle to its independence and contradicts OSCE commitments,” said the body’s Dunja Mijatovic, in charge of monitoring media freedom. Other areas of concern include the recent adoption by the Hungarian Parliament of parts of a media package with elements threatening media freedom and a possible threat in Greece to a minority radio station that broadcasts in Turkish, while the organisation expresses hope that Germany will adopt a law protecting investigative journalists. Beyond the EU, the “brutal attack” against a Serbian journalist known for his outspokenness against nationalism was highlighted as was the the “high number of criminal prosecutions” against journalists in Turkey covering sensitive issues as well “serious infringements” on media pluralism in Kyrgyzstan and a series of attacks against journalists in Russia. “Many argue that media freedom is in decline across the OSCE region. In some aspects, I can subscribe to that,” said Ms Mitjatovic. “Authorities have yet to understand that media are not their private property and that journalists have the right to scrutinize those who are elected.” “Violence against journalists equals violence against society and democracy and should be met with harsh condemnation and prosecution of the perpetrators,” she added. With the internet changing the nature and scope of reporting, Ms Mijatovi also promised a study into the various internet laws in place across the OSCE countries. “My office is currently working on the compilation of the first comprehensive matrix on internet legislation which will include an overview of legal provisions related to freedom of the media, the free flow of information and media pluralism on the internet in the OSCE region.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 What makes a good UN story? We hinted at the Kevin Rudd idea earlier but we were still waiting for further developments. Are we seeing here rumors because of infighting in Australia on the way to their National elections August 21, 2010? Are we on the trail of rumors intended to save the Ban Ki-moon reelection to a second term? Are we watching an Obama approach to create a new environment to save negotiations on climate? Kevin Rudd would be an excellent choice to extricate the UN from the hole it created in the “Seal the Deal” charade when every child could have seen that the G192 is no environment to talk about Sustainable Energy options. Australia is no good example either – but Kevin Rudd was ready to step out of his nation’s “is” and aim for a better future. He got punished for this and perhaps is now ready for revenge by working on a global level that will then sweep with him his own country as well. With his experience as Australia’s Prime Minister with-vision that was cut short from bringing his own country into the group of real leaders for tomorrow, he can work with President Obama and perhaps the other four leaders that hammered out the Copenhagen platform that is not dependent on all climate mongers of the UN circuit. As a fresh figure, he could perhaps sit down with the ALBA folks and take the best ideas they have and incorporate them also in a new recipe under the SUSTAINABILITY big sky of the future. Will the UN accept him as a new Super Czar of a combined UNCSD and UNFCCC – or let him form a new structure so these older structures will just wilt away into oblivion slowly? Who knows? But let us follow this new world hype. The subject having slowly boiled in the PRESS has reached also www.UNelection.org – so it is time for us to try out the waters ourselves also. This then reinforced the UNelections interest in the issue as per added - ================================================= http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special… Kevin Rudd could be offered UN role before end of election campaign
![]() Kevin Rudd talks with UN secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon / AP Source: AP KEVIN Rudd’s new United Nations post could be announced before the end of the election in what looms as another major embarrassment for Julia Gillard. The Herald Sun can reveal the UN body Mr Rudd is being considered for is being set up under the working title High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability. Mr Rudd is believed to have been backed for the post by the UN’s chief climate adviser, Janos Pasztor, and is odds-on to be offered the job. Diplomatic sources said the decision could be made within weeks, which raises the spectre of an appointment before the election. “It’s on the cards,” a source said of a pre-election announcement. The Herald Sun believes Mr Rudd is favoured in part because he will have direct access to resources paid for by the Australian taxpayer. This is on the assumption that the former prime minister is re-elected to Federal Parliament on August 21, 2010. Climate change reform will be the centrepiece of the panel, virtually guaranteeing conflict with a Gillard government, assuming Labor is re-elected. Sources said it would be created to look at climate change in the context of broader sustainable development, and would be part-time. Mr Rudd has declined to say whether the appointment would be paid. If he were to be paid, this could raise allegations he would be a part-time MP. Mr Rudd’s spokesman directed questions to the UN, declining to say whether he already had accepted the position. Mr Rudd has previously said he would serve a full term in Parliament and that any UN position would be part-time. “It is a matter, of course, for the United Nations Secretary-General to clarify what roles would be played by any individual on such a panel,” Mr Rudd said on July 22. The biggest political risk for the Government is that the UN body clashes on climate change policy backed by Ms Gillard. Mr Rudd previously backed a 5 per cent emissions cut on 2000 levels by 2020 as well as a so-called cap-and-trade scheme, which involves setting limits on carbon emissions but allowing heavy polluters to buy permits to allow them to emit more carbon. Mr Rudd dropped his legislation this year when it was blocked by the Coalition in the Senate and his handling of the issue was considered crucial to him being dumped as PM. —————————————–
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 The facts as described in: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/07… Canadian woman is next top UN internal watchdog. By JOHN HEILPRIN UNITED NATIONS The United Nations turned to a Canadian woman on Wednesday who was chief auditor for the World Bank as its choice for the next head of the U.N.’s internal watchdog agency. Carman Lapointe-Young won approval from the General Assembly to become the undersecretary-general for oversight. She will be given the huge task of trying to quickly fix an agency that her predecessor says is in disarray. She will start her job on Sept. 13, the U.N. announced. She will move to New York from Rome, where she has headed the oversight office of the U.N.’s fund for agricultural development since February 2009. The Manitoba native was appointed to the non-renewable, five-year term as head of the U.N.’s Office of Internal Oversight Services by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, whose leadership was severely criticized in an end-of-assignment memo by outgoing OIOS head Inga-Britt Ahlenius of Sweden. Ban said in a statement that Lapointe-Young has the “breadth and depth of experience and expertise required for this demanding position.” He said she will be expected to rebuild OIOS and fill its many vacancies as soon as possible. Ban is reviewing Ahlenius’ memo and has ordered a review of the U.N.’s ability to investigate itself, his chief of staff, Vijay Nambiar, said last week. Bea Edwards of the Government Accountability Project, a Washington-based nonprofit law firm, said Wednesday one of the key challenges Lapointe-Young will face is to redirect OIOS investigations onto cases of major financial fraud and corruption. Her firm has represented at least one OIOS investigator who filed a whistleblower complaint against the division’s acting director. “We would just hope that she would re-focus the attention of OIOS onto the more significant cases of fraud and corruption, and there would be less emphasis on these petty, internal investigations,” said Edwards, referring to internal probes that she said were focused on allegations such as improper travel expense claims and pornography on computers. Over the past decade the U.N. has been rocked a series of corruption scandals in its multibillion-dollar spending. The best known resulted from a two-year investigation into the U.N.-run oil-for-food program for Iraq led by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker. Volcker’s inquiry culminated in an October 2005 report accusing more than 2,200 companies from some 40 countries of colluding with Saddam Hussein’s regime to bilk $1.8 billion from a program aimed at easing Iraqi suffering under U.N. sanctions. As a result of the scandal, the U.N. created a special anti-corruption task force between 2006 and 2008 that found 20 significant corruption schemes. Its work led to sanctions against about 50 U.N. vendors, many of which were permanently debarred, and felony convictions against three U.N. officials, including two senior procurement officials. Lapointe-Young won the nod despite some grumbling among diplomats from developing nations who said her appointment upset an informal understanding that the top accountability post should alternate between developing and rich Western nations. At the General Assembly, several diplomats touched on the issue of geographical diversity. U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky acknowledged the concerns of representatives of “regional groups” in the General Assembly who were consulted before Wednesday’s approval, but said Ban’s selection was based on “merit,” ultimately. From 2004 to 2009, she was the auditor general of The World Bank Group. It was during that time that Paul Wolfowitz resigned as president of the World Bank amid controversy over a pay package for his girlfriend, a bank employee. She succeeds Ahlenius, who left the OIOS post in mid-July after blaming Ban for blocking her attempt to hire a former U.S. federal prosecutor as permanent head of the investigation division and taking other measures that she said undermined the operational independence her office is supposed to have. Ban and his senior advisers have quickly closed ranks and disputed many of the memo’s assertions while trying to put the dispute quickly behind them. “Where there are lessons to be learned, we will draw them,” Angela Kane, the undersecretary-general for management, said in a statement Wednesday. In a statement labeled “Accountability for a Stronger United Nations,” Kane said Lapointe-Young will inherit “an office with 76 vacant posts” because Ahlenius failed to fill them. —————————- AT THE FAREWELL PARTY GIVEN BY OUTGOING AMBASSADOR H. E. YUKIO TAKASU OF JAPAN, SEEMINGLY MR. BAN KI-MOON EXPRESSED SURPRISE AT REPORTS THAT SOUTH AFRICA WAS PROMISED A SENIOR POST AT OIOS IN EXCHANGE FOR NOT BLOCKING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CANADIAN. so, here we have his commitment to let the new OIOS Chief pick her own Deputy? At UN, Farewell to Takasu Amid Echoes of OIOS, of Human Right to Water and Sushi By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, July 28 — Japan’s Yukio Takasu held a farewell to New York and the UN on Tuesday night at his country’s East Side townhouse. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was there — expressing surprise at reports that South Africa was promised a senior post at the Office of Internal Oversight Services in change for not blocking the top spot going to a Canadian - as well as his Under Secretaries General Lynn Pascoe, Kiyotaka Akasaka and Angela Kane. After Mr. Ban and his well liked bride left, much talk turned to the controversy stirred by the damning End of Assignment Report of outgoing OIOS chief Inga Britt Ahlenius. While usually at the UN, the press asks Ambassadors for information and opinion, this time is was the reverse. Several Ambassadors asked Inner City Press, What do you think this means for Ban getting or not getting a second term? Major Permanent Representatives had read the critical Press coverage. “This is not good,” they said. “But will Obama have the decisiveness to act?” Susan Rice was asked and told the media as if by rote that the US supports Ban. Others in the Obama Administration are not saying the same thing. Ban’s USGs worked the crowd. Angela Kane of Ban’s Department of Management bowed, Japanese style, with an outgoing members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions from, where else, Japan. Due to ACABQ’s penchant for anonymity, we will not name her but wish her well. As the UN’s envoy to Darfur said earlier at the stakeout, ACABQ recently visited El Fasher. She noted of Inner City Press, your coverage of ACABQ is always fair. Hey, it’s the only accountability mechanism in the UN, along with the press. Kiyo Akasaka of Ban’s Department of Public Information was in his element, offering food recommendations and this new media news, that the UN is agreeing to a refer in their forthcoming guidelines to a willingness to accredit bloggers — and not only “journalists who write blogs” — although, strangely, confined to a footnote. We’ll see. ——————————- The reality at the UN is that seemingly there is much financial interest by many countries and this includes covering of plain corruption – so – OIOS would have its hands full if it were to go after this plateful of problems. Take for instance all those companies that bribed their way through the Iraqi “Oil for Food” project. Did anyone look at them, i.e. the French bank that was involved? Paul Volcker put it all in the open and the UN pushed it back under the rug by appointing OIOS. Will it finally be picked up? Then, Ms. Alhenius also had a clear conflict. It is a Swedish company that got a non-competitive contract to redo the UN buildings. Some at he UN wanted to see this reviewed – clearly a matter for OIOS – but we heard no action on this. Only some members of the Press kept pointing at the problem. So far we do not know of conflicts of interest involving Canada, will the new Chief start out with her right foot in staking her position – as controller – the buck stops here? Something like the US GAO – US Comptroller General? In what regards her attitude when auditing the World Bank, we found an excellent interview with her: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4153/is_3_64/ai_n27504378/?tag=content;col1 that we highly recommend to our readers. Making a difference: the World Bank Group’s Auditor General Carman Lapointe-Young says her team of auditors is playing its part in the organization’s fight to end poverty.Internal Auditor, June, 2008 by Neil Baker———————————— Further, we are gratified that our article was picked up byUNelections.org Canadian Woman is Next Top UN Internal Watchdog (Opinion) – July 28### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 29th, 2010 WORLD NEWS – JULY 29, 2010 Climate report shows Earth has heated up over 50 years. Which in the printed Wall Street version was rechristened – “CLIMATE STUDY CITES 2000 as WARMEST DECADE.” This appropriate to the US inward look of New York, while the above title is clear better positioned for the world at large - By GAUTAM NAIK A new assessment concludes that the Earth has been getting warmer over the past 50 years and the past decade was the warmest on record. The State of the Climate 2009 report, published Wednesday as a special supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, was compiled by 300 scientists from 48 countries and drew on measures of 10 crucial climate indicators. Seven of the indicators were rising, including air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, sea level, ocean heat and humidity. Three indicators were declining, including Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere. “Each indicator is changing as we’d expect in a warming world,” said Peter Thorne, senior researcher at the Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, a research consortium based in College Park, Md., who was involved in compiling the report. The report’s conclusions broadly match those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body, which published its last set of findings in 2007. The IPCC report contained some errors, which further stoked the debate about the existence, causes and effects of global warming. The new report incorporates data from the past few years that weren’t included in the last IPCC assessment. While the IPCC report concluded that evidence for human-caused global warming was “unequivocal” and was linked to emissions of greenhouse gases, the latest report didn’t seek to address the issue. The report said, “Global average surface and lower-troposphere temperatures during the last three decades have been progressively warmer than all earlier decades, and the 2000s (2000-09) was the warmest decade in the instrumental record.” The troposphere is the lowest layer of the atmosphere. The scientists reported that they were surprised to find Greenland’s glaciers were losing ice at an accelerating rate. They also concluded that 90% of planetary warming over the past 50 years has gone into the oceans. Most of it had accumulated in near-surface layers, home to phytoplankton, tiny plants crucial to virtually all life in the sea. A new study has found that rising sea temperature may have had a harmful effect on global concentrations of phytoplankton over the past century. —————————– BUT THE WALL STREET JOURNAL IS VERY ANEMIC ON CONTENT OF ABOVE NEWS – IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, AS MOSTLY ALMOST – GO TO THE FINANCIAL TIMES. HERE YOU FIND FIONA HARVEY’S FULL ARTICLE – SHE CONTRIBUTES TO THE EDITORIAL SECTION AS WELL. YOU WILL BE IN THE CLEAR ABOUT THE MACHINATIONS IN WASHINGTON AS WELL. You will also see there the Washington rot as in the following: “Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute in the US, formerly in charge of energy with the powerful CSIS, said the new report would not change people’s minds. “It’s clear that the scientific case for global warming alarmism is weak. The scientific case for [many of the claims] is unsound and we are finding out all the time how unsound it is.” You will find that there was no doubt about the implication that it is humans who did it except in the words of that outspoken minority of industry lobbyists that hold power over Washington. ————————– NOAA finds “human fingerprints” on climateJuly 28th, 2010 by Fiona Harvey
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 23rd, 2010 We learn from the IPS article that even Korea, the Ban Ki-moon home country, is turning against him by saying at the fifth Committee – “ The organisation should no longer be a safety net for those who cannot show competency.” The full truth is that under the Ban Ki-moon cabinet the UN was reduced to a House of Midgets (please excuse my incorrectness by saying this because I immediately recognize that midgets are full human beings). The UN Administration ends up reflecting into the pool of Ambassadorships and UN stuff. If nothing is done this is because many of the others at top chose to reflect the man on top and end up doing nothing more then back him and his system, and fight for chairs rather then any ideals of their mission at an institute that has lost its meaning. Let us add here that we were shocked to find out that the new Prime Minister of the UK, Mr. David Cameron, in his two days trip to the US this week found time to visit with the UN Secretary-General, a fact that might be taken as meaning the backing of his position – or cynics may say – the campaigning for some more UK positions at this UN rather then any expression of criticism of where the UN is going. Which are the countries that speak up on the UN? The US did when standing up at ECOSOC on the Gay NGO, but will the US say that throwing money at this UN is no way to improve the World? Is Sweden going to come out and back Ms. Ahlhenius? Are the other small European States doing more then chase positions at the secretariat? Will Japan direct its UN people to stiffen up? The Department of Public Information nominally belongs to them – but did their man in charge, Mr. Kiyotaka Akasaka, clean his house? ———————————————————————————
FRIDAY, JULY 23, 2010 U.N. Chief Defends Himself Against Attack on Leadership. UNITED NATIONS, Jul 22 (IPS) – A sharp-witted newspaper columnist once remarked that in Washington DC the ship of state always leaks at the top. The United Nations is perhaps no better — judging by the circumstances surrounding the leaking of a confidential 51-page document in which Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is politically crucified by one of his own senior officials. Responding to the blistering attack by departing Under-Secretary-General Inga-Britt Ahlenius, Ban said he had always welcomed constructive criticism. “But as public servants, there are rules and procedures. In this case, a trust, a bond, had been broken”. Ban told a meeting of senior advisers Thursday it was regrettable that a confidential document had been leaked to the press. The Washington Post broke the story Monday but ran only excerpts from the report in which Ahlenius, a former auditor-general of Sweden, challenged the very leadership of the secretary-general. “There is no transparency (and) there is lack of accountability. Rather than supporting the internal oversight which is the sign of strong leadership and good governance, you have strived to control it which is to undermine its position. I do not see any signs of reform in the Organisation,” Ahlenius wrote in her “End of Assignment Report’. After spending seven years with the United Nations, Ahlenius served the last five as head of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), the investigative arm of the world body. The attacks by Ahlenius were fast and furious: – “It will take time to see the harm caused by the weak secretary-general because the process of decay and weakening of the Organisation and the Secretariat is a stealthy process”; – “Absence of strategic guidance and leadership manifests itself not only through failure to bring about change and reform of the Organisation; it also manifests itself as a sort of an “adhocracy”; disintegrated and ill thought through “reforms” are launched without adequate analysis and with lack of understanding and a holisitc view”; – “You are undermining the authority of your senior advisers both by affording them short — one year — mandates and also by exercising your direct authority over the appointments of their staff”; – “Senior positions politicized, a culture that will filter down in the organisation, compromising the merit-based recruitment, undermining excellence and lowering the moral; (and) the health and capacity of the secretariat will be ignored”; – “However, you yourself, the deputy secretary-general, the chef de cabinet and the deputy chef de cabinet have not been available for any interviews. The Risk Assessment is carried out in your interest and we had expected that you and your closest staff would have taken interest in and contributed to its conclusions. However, in spite of a number of reminders, we have not been able to access you and your closest staff and we will therefore conclude our Risk Assessment — short of your crucial contribution– and submit it to you for a follow up discussion“. “I regret this lack of interest from your side in contributing to this process established in your interest and in the interest of the Organisation.” The report cites at least one delegate who complained in the Fifth Committee that “the overall culture in the secretariat has not shown much improvement in terms of accountability… The organisation should no longer be a safety net for those who cannot show competency.” And this, the report says, comes ironically from a delegate from Korea, home country of the secretary-general. The report also points out that the culture of the Organisation is traditionally one of secrecy. “Such secretiveness serves us poorly, it only serves to feed rumours, gossip and finally distrust within the organisation and between the organisation and its external stake holders, including the media.” In the information vacuum created by secretiveness, the public and the media are very much left to information from informal sources, well or ill-intentioned “leaks”. “Regrettably, these leaks in the secretariat are rather seen as an argument to further restrict information and to investigate the leaks, than as an argument for increased transparency. Your own Executive Office is rather described to be “consumed by leaks.” “Transparency serves in the long run to improve the organisation and to establish the culture of responsibility and accountability that you say you envisage.” “I see no visible effort to deliver on your stated commitment to increased transparency.” Ahlenius also implicitly portrays Ban in poor light compared to three former secretaries-general. She says Boutros Boutros-Ghali established the intellectual leadership of the secretariat. Kofi Annan reconfirmed the role of the secretary-general as both the “norm-entrepreneur” of the world and his role as the pre-eminent diplomat and chief negotiator; Dag Hammarskjold was the one who defined the role of the secretary-general and pronounced himself often on the two roles; he maintained that the “Charter gives the secretary-general an explicit political role. His active and successful intervention in international crises was the demonstration of his conviction; But where does Ban stand? “I regret to say the (U.N.) Secretariat now is in a process of decay. It is not only falling apart into silos – the Secretariat is drifting, to use the words of one of my senior colleagues,” Ahlenius said. “I am concerned that we are in a process of decline and reduced relevance of the Organisation. In short, we seem to be seen less and less as a relevant partner in the resolution of world problems”. This, she points out, inevitably risks weakening the United Nations’ possibilities to fulfill its mandate. “Ultimately, that is to the detriment of peace and stability in the world. This is as sad as it is serious.” The detailed 51-page report follows: Report ——————————————————– We have covered this issue earlier. Please see: http://www.sustainabilitank.info/?s=Ahle… and more specifically: http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/07… “An Explosion at the UN – the departing Swedish head of the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), in a 50 page memo, makes it clear that this UN Administration has failed to clean up the UN and actually actively insisted on making things worse – we observed this a couple of years ago. It is time to look for a Can-Do UN Secretary General as we have observed earlier this year. The article echoed in Vienna also.” Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 20th, 2010 Much of the UN rebuttal is mush and we will report on how this unfolds. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 22nd, 2010 Friday, July 23, 2010, The Japan Times online.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/mail/nn20… Judo gold medalists break down barriers by teaching Israeli, Palestinian kidsJERUSALEM (Kyodo) Japanese men’s judo Olympic gold medalists Yasuhiro Yamashita and Kosei Inoue taught the martial art to some 50 Israeli and Palestinian children at a dojo in Jerusalem.
Speaking in front of about 30 Israeli and 20 Palestinian children, Yamashita, a gold medalist at the 1984 Los Angeles Games, said, “I think it is meaningful that Israeli and Palestinian children are grappling together to do judo.” The event was held as part of activities by the Solidarity of International Judo Education. Yamashita heads the Japan-based nonprofit organization aimed at spreading judo internationally. Yamashita told the children about the time that Egyptian judoka Mohamed Ali Rashwan did not target Yamashita’s injured right leg in the final of the men’s judo open weight class at the Los Angeles Olympics. “Judo is a sport that develops an attitude of respect for other people,” Yamashita said. “I’d like you to make a point of respecting those around you even after returning home from the dojo.” Inoue, the gold medalist in the under-100 kg class at the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney and who is now studying in Britain, taught his classes in English. A 13-year old Palestinian boy, who took part in the practice wearing a borrowed judo jacket and a pair of shorts, said: “(Mr. Inoue) was very strong. I want to participate in the Olympics as a Palestine representative in the future.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 20th, 2010 Much of the UN rebuttal is mush and we will report on how this unfolds. —————————— Departing U.N. official calls Ban’s leadership ‘deplorable’ in 50-page memo.
Inga-Britt Ahlenius wrote a 50-page memo upon the end of her term as head of the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services. (2008 Photo By Mark Garten/Associated Press)
By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 20, 2010 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/19/AR2010071904734.html?referrer=emailarticle
UNITED NATIONS — The outgoing chief of a U.N. office charged with combating corruption at the United Nations has issued a stinging rebuke of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, accusing him of undermining her efforts and leading the global institution into an era of decline, according to a confidential end-of-assignment report. The memo by Inga-Britt Ahlenius, a Swedish auditor who stepped down Friday as undersecretary general of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, represents an extraordinary personal attack on Ban from a senior U.N. official. The memo also marks a challenge to Ban’s studiously cultivated image as a champion of accountability. Shortly after taking office in 2007, Ban committed himself to restoring the United Nations’ reputation, which had been sullied by revelations of corruption in the agency’s oil-for-food program in Iraq. But Ahlenius says that, rather than being an advocate for accountability, Ban, along with his top advisers, has systematically sought to undercut the independence of her office, initially by trying to set up a competing investigations unit under his control and then by thwarting her efforts to hire her own staff. “Your actions are not only deplorable, but seriously reprehensible. . . . Your action is without precedent and in my opinion seriously embarrassing for yourself,” Ahlenius wrote in the 50-page memo to Ban, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post. “I regret to say that the secretariat now is in a process of decay.” Ban’s top advisers said that Ahlenius’s memo constituted a deeply unbalanced account of their differences and that her criticism of Ban’s stewardship of the United Nations was patently unfair. “A look at his record shows that Secretary General Ban has provided genuine visionary leadership on important issues from climate change to development to women’s empowerment. He has promoted the cause of gender balance in general as well as within the organization. He has led from the front on important political issues from Gaza to Haiti to Sudan,” Ban’s chief of staff, Vijay Nambiar, wrote in a response. “It is regrettable to note,” Nambiar added, “that many pertinent facts were overlooked or misrepresented” in Ahlenius’s memo. The departure of Ahlenius, 72, coincides with a period of crisis in the United Nations’ internal investigations division. During the past two years, the world body has shed some of its top investigators. It has also failed to fill dozens of vacancies, including that of the chief of the investigations division in the Office of Internal Oversight Services. That post has been vacant since 2006, leaving a void in the United Nations’ ability to police itself, diplomats say. “We are disappointed with the recent performance of [the U.N.'s] investigations division,” said Mark Kornblau, spokesman for the U.S. mission to the United Nations. “The coming change in . . . leadership is an opportunity to bring about a significant improvement in its performance to increase oversight and transparency throughout the organization.” The U.N. General Assembly established the Office of Internal Oversight Services in 1994 to conduct management audits of the United Nations’ principal departments and to conduct investigations into corruption and misconduct. The founding resolution granted the office “operational independence” but placed it under the authority of the secretary general and made it dependent on the U.N. departments it policed for much of its funding and administrative support. The dispute between Ahlenius and Ban has underscored some of the resulting tensions and exposed a protracted and acrimonious struggle for power over the course of U.N. investigations. While Ahlenius cited Ban’s move to set up a new investigations unit as a sign that he was seeking to undermine her independence, Nambiar said that it was intended to strengthen the United Nations’ ability to fight corruption. Ahlenius also clashed with Ban over her efforts to hire a former federal prosecutor, Robert Appleton, who headed the U.N. Procurement Task Force, a temporary white-collar crime unit that carried out aggressive investigations into corruption in U.N. peacekeeping missions from 2006 to last year. The unit’s investigations led to an unprecedented number of misconduct findings by U.N. officials and prompted federal probes into corruption. Ban’s advisers said they blocked Appleton’s appointment on the grounds that female candidates had not been properly considered and said that the final selection should have been made by Ban, not Ahlenius. “The secretary general fully recognizes the operational independence of OIOS,” Nambiar said. But that, he said, “does not excuse her from applying the standard rules of recruitment.” —————————————- The above story, as per – http://www.orf.at/#/stories/2004590/ - also echoed in Vienna. Scheidende UNO-Diplomatin rechnet mit Ban ab. Die scheidende Chefkontrolleurin der Vereinten Nationen geht laut Medienberichten mit Generalsekretär Ban Ki Moon hart ins Gericht. Ban habe ihre Arbeit als oberste Korruptionsbekämpferin unterlaufen und die UNO in eine Ära des Niedergangs geführt, schrieb Inga-Britt Ahlenius laut einem Bericht der „Washington Post“ gestern in einem vertraulichen Memorandum. Entgegen seinen Ankündigungen zum Amtsantritt 2007 habe Ban die durch mehrere Affären angeschlagene Reputation der Vereinten Nationen nicht mit allen Mitteln geschützt. Vielmehr habe er ihr Amt der Chefrevisorin mehr und mehr geschwächt, schreibe Ahlenius in dem 50-Seiten-Papier an Ban: „Ihr Handeln ist nicht nur bedauerlich, sondern sogar verwerflich.“ Es sei beispiellos und „meiner Meinung nach für Sie selbst beschämend“. Das Blatt zitierte: „Ich bedaure es, sagen zu müssen, dass das Sekretariat in einem Zerfallsprozess ist.“ Kritiker werfen Ban seit langem vor, die UNO nur zu verwalten und vor wirksamen politischen Initiativen zurückzuschrecken. UNO-Mitarbeiter wiesen die Vorwürfe in der „Washington Post“ als „unfair“ zurück. Ban habe mehrere politische Schwerpunkte gesetzt, etwa beim Klimaschutz und bei der Gleichstellung der Frau. Die Abrechnung der scheidenden Schwedin sei ein „höchst unausgewogener Ausdruck ihrer Differenzen“ mit Ban., ### |


















David Hodas <drhodas@gmail.com>
Video: Photographer focuses on Pakistan flood
Video: Aid trickles into flood ravaged Pakistan

















