Why the world is not over the moon on Ban.

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.

———————————
T P Sreenivasan is a former ambassador of India to the United Nations, Vienna, and a former Governor for India at the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna. He is currently the Director General, Kerala [ Images ] International Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, and a Member of the National Security Advisory Board.

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,
the Federal Ministry of Defence and Sports (Directorate for Security Policy,
and the Vienna Institute for International Dialogue and Cooperation.

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
Bruno Kreisky Forum
for International Dialogue
Armbrustergasse 15
A-1190 Vienna

Reihe: GENIAL DAGEGEN/ kuratiert von Robert Misik

Montag, 6. September, 19.00 Uhr

Bruno Kreisky Forum für internationalen Dialog | Armbrustergasse 15 | 1190 Wien

Anmeldungen unter: Tel.: 3188260/20 | Fax: 318 82 60/10 | e-mail: einladung.kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

FRANZ WALTER

Institut für Demokratieforschung Göttingen

VORWÄRTS ODER ABWÄRTS?

Hat die Sozialdemokratie noch eine Zukunft?

Moderation:   Robert Misik, Journalist und Autor

Vorwärts oder Abwärts?: Zur Transformation der Sozialdemokratie (edition suhrkamp)

Jospin, Blair, Schröder: 1998 sah es so aus, als stünde die europäische Sozialdemokratie vor einem goldenen Zeitalter. Elf Jahre später hat die SPD 10.192.426 Millionen Stimmen verloren und sechs Parteivorsitzende verschlissen, die niederländische Partij van de Arbeid fuhr 2002 das schlechteste Ergebnis ihrer Geschichte ein, die schwedischen Sozialdemokraten 2006, die österreichischen 2008. Der »Dritte Weg« erwies sich als Weg ins Abseits, längst ist vom Ende einer Volkspartei die Rede.

Es sieht so aus, als hätten die Sozialdemokraten keine überzeugende Antwort auf den radikalen Wandel der Arbeitswelt, auf Individualisierung und Globalisierung.

Franz Walter, einer der profiliertesten deutschen Parteienforscher, untersucht die Ursachen für den Niedergang der SPD. Er wirft einen Blick über die Grenzen Deutschlands und fragt, was Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität in unserer Zeit bedeuten.

Melitta Campostrini
Bruno Kreisky Forum
for International Dialogue
Armbrustergasse 15
A-1190 Vienna
tel.: ++43 1 3188260/11
fax: ++43 1 3188260/10
e-mail: kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

www.kreisky-forum.org

Under the Patronage of the President of the Republic of Austria – Dr. Heinz Fischer.

With a Honorary Committe that includes Patricia Kahane – President of the Karl Kahane Foundation,  Dr. Michael Hauple – Mayor of Vienna, as well as Former Vice Chancellor and Foreign Minister  – Dr. Alois Mock, and famous Austrian artists – Andre Heller and Joseph Hader. Also among others, Rabbi Marc Schneier from the US, Rafi Elul from Israel, Ibrahim Issa from Palestine.

The Conference will deal with Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and the toning down of media that inflames hatred.

The Conference will avoid  touching upon Middle East Conflict Issues in an effort at reaching first mutual understanding before tackling issues on which there can be built an agreement to disagree – and seeing that there are other points of view.

 http://www.mjconference.org/

THE MUSLIM JEWISH CONFERENCE – VIENNA – AUGUST 1-6, 2010.

«Our first step together creating the power to forge a link between possibility and reality.
Because the pronunciation of our names is no barrier for friendships.»

The first ‘Muslim Jewish Conference’ 2010 is being held in Vienna from the 1st until
the 6th of August. 60 students from all over the world with a common goal of
establishing peaceful relations between both religions will participate. The conference
consists of discussion committees, guest speakers, open dialogue panels and social
events.

The idea for this project was born in Vienna by two Austrian students, Ilja Sichrovsky
and Matthias Gattermeier, due to their experiences at international student
conferences and driven by the desire to create cultural awareness between young
aspiring Jewish and Muslim academics.

Today, the ‘MJC’-committee harbours over 20 volunteers from Asia, the Middle East, Europe and America, including countries like Austria, Israel, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Turkey and the U S. The Assistant Secretary General in charge of the core of 15  volunteers is Ehab Bilal who grew up in Austria, studied in the UK, and is a Muslim of Libyan parentage.

Ilja Sichrovsky, founder and Secretary General of the MJC: “Representing the
University of Vienna at numerous international student conferences, I have
witnessed inevitable misunderstanding and prejudices between young Muslims and
Jews at first hand. The ‘Muslim Jewish Conference’ was called to life, to be the first
step together for young people creating the power to forge a link between possibility
and reality. Because the pronunciation of our names is no barrier for friendships.”

The ‘Muslim Jewish Conference’ is officially endorsed by the ‘United Nations Alliance of Civilisations’ (UNAOC) and the Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The project is partly financed by the ‘Karl Kahane Foundation’ as well as by private donors.

Our vision is to make the MJC an annual conference, set up in different countries
each year and to provide a platform for real change in the interaction between
Muslim and Jewish Communities.

The participants represent a new generation of thinkers and upcoming opinion leaders who are connected by their joint believe in a new era of cooperation.

————————————————————————————–
Date: 1. – 6.08.2010
Place: Institute for International Development – University of Vienna
c/o Institute for African Sciences – Campus – AAKH, Hof 5.1
A-1090 Wien
URL: www.mjconference.org

———————————————————————————–

The Organisation Committee:

• Ilja Sichrovsky – Secretary General
• Ehab Bilal – Assist. Secretary General
• Matthias Gattermeier – Logistics, Protocol & Security
• Fatima Hasanain – Committees & Content
• Asad Farooq – Organization & Registration
• Florence Rivero – Organization & Design
• Yvonne Feiger – Logistics & Fundraising
• Mustafa Jalil Qureshi – Head of chairs
• Daniel Gallner – Finance
• Abdul Niazi – Ambassador for the MJC
• Stefanie Andruchowitz – Head of Department Support
• Valerie Prassl – Head Public Relations
• Akshay Ganju – Chair
• Eyal Raviv – Chair
• Magdalena Kloss – Chair

————————————————————————————

When we researched the internet, we found that The Muttahidda Jihad Council (MJC), an alliance of Muslim Kashmiri freedom fighters as they call themselves, or terrorists, as we call them, is what the web knew as MJC before the start of this new Austrian effort. Things get even worse as there are other Abdul Niazi on the web. Whatever, we hope that the Austrian effort grows to become a success and we remember the role Chancellor Kreisky had in starting Israeli-Palestinian negotiations years ago.

Further, Karl Kahane and Bruno Kreisky , with other Kreisky friends, created in 1991 through the Karl Kahane Foundation also the Bruno Kreisky Forum in order to continue the Kreisky’s work on Human Rights, the Middle Eastern Peace Process,  Europe after the Cold War, and other issues close to him – we assume that the powerful ongoing Kreisky Forum had something to do with the organization of this new effort at tackling the Middle East peace process issue from a longer term understanding base.

The involvement of Rabbi Marc Schneier from the US is proof that his three year old  ongoing effort, on which our website reported several times,  of  bringing Jewish and Muslim communities in the US to a closer contact with meetings in homes as well as within religious centers, intended to listen to each others deep concerns rather then professing to shout at each other their frustrations, is part of the concept of the new effort.
 http://www.karlkahanefoundation.org/inde…

Also, New Generations – Crossing Borders.
In 1994 the Middle East Youth Peace Forum together with the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue started the project New Generations – Crossing Borders. A group of young Palestinians, Israelis, Jordanians and Austrians met regularly over a period of four years in order to establish personal relations, overcome stereotypes, gain skills in conflict resolution and acquire leadership qualities.

The experiences of the participants were documented in the German/English publication Crossing Borders by Margit Schmidt et al, published by Picus Verlag, Vienna, 1999.

This comes to show that the young may eventually achieve what the older generation was not able to achieve.

??http://www.karlkahanefoundation.org/index.php?36

———————————————————————————-

Jüdisch-muslimisches Treffen.

Muslim Jewish Conference von 1. bis 6. August in Wien.

Wien. 60 muslimische und jüdische Studierende aus aller Welt treffen von 1. bis 6. August in der Uni Wien bei der “Muslim Jewish Conference” (MJC) zusammen. Das Ziel: eine gemeinsame Sprache zu finden und Vorurteile zu überwinden, sagt MJC-Generalsekretär Ilja Sichrovsky. Der 27-Jährige studiert in Wien “Internationale Entwicklung”.

Sichrovsky hat mehrmals an der “World Model United Nations Conference” teilgenommen, bei der eine Uni-Delegation ein Land verkörpert. Dabei ist der Wiener Jude mit muslimischen Studenten in Kontakt gekommen und musste feststellen, dass die Vorurteile auf beiden Seiten groß sind, man aber vieles im intensiven Gespräch ausräumen kann. “Ich habe gemerkt: Wir sind gar nicht so verschieden, wie es uns Medien und auch unsere Eltern zu vermitteln versucht haben.” So kam ihm 2008 erstmals die Idee für die Konferenz.

Gemeinsames Papier

Organisator ist Ehab Bilal (25). Der bekennende, aber nicht streng praktizierende Moslem kommt aus einer libyschen Familie, wuchs in Wien auf und studierte in England. Seit 9/11 hat er das Gefühl, “dass ich schon ein bisschen unterdrückt werde wegen meiner Religion”. Wenn er reise, werde er drei Mal gefragt, mit welchem Ziel er komme. Ihn ärgert, dass wegen einiger Extremisten die gesamte Religion in Verruf kommt.

Zu drei Themen werden die Studenten im August eine gemeinsame Deklaration veröffentlichen:

“Antisemitismus und Islamophobie” – Sichrovsky betont, dass es sich um eine Aufzählung, nicht um eine Gleichstellung beider Begriffe handelt – sowie die Rolle der Bildung und der Medien im Abbau von gegenseitigen Stereotypen.

Der Nahostkonflikt wird beim ersten Mal bewusst ausgeklammert. Man müsse zuerst eine gemeinsame Sprache finden, bevor man ein Thema angehe, “wo man weiß, dass man anderer Meinung ist”, so Sichrovsky.

Die Konferenz wird großteils von der Karl Kahane Foundation finanziert, Bundespräsident Heinz Fischer übernahm den Ehrenschutz. 120 Studenten hatten sich beworben, die besten wurden ausgewählt. Ihr Spektrum reicht von sehr religiös bis säkular.

http://www.mjconference.org

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
 http://ipsterraviva.net/UN/currentNew.as…

U.N. Chief Defends Himself Against Attack on Leadership.
by Thalif Deen

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
by Pincas Jawetz ( PJ at SustainabiliTank.com)

Much of the UN rebuttal is mush and we will report on how this unfolds.

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.

——————————
„Verwerflich“

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.,

UN ADVISORY GROUP SEEKS TO ENHANCE PUBLIC-PRIVATE LINKS TO BOOST ACCESS TO ENERGY.

The potential of new public-private partnerships to enhance energy access and efficiency topped today’s discussions by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s high-level advisory group on the nexus between energy and climate change.

“Governments alone will not be able to deal with the challenges,” said Kandeh K. Yumkella, Director-General of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), at the latest meeting of the Energy and Climate Change Advisory Group.

“We need a commitment from all sectors of society, including the private sector, academia and civil society, as well as from international organizations and NGOs [non-governmental organizations],” he added.

The meeting in Mexico City was hosted by Carlos Slim Helú, Mexican businessman and one the world’s wealthiest people, who is also a member of the Group, set up by Mr. Ban last year and comprising 20 business leaders, academics and representatives of the UN and civil society.

In April, the Group launched a report calling on nations to commit themselves to two complementary goals.

First, it urged universal access to modern energy services that are reliable, affordable, sustainable, and, if possible, from low-emissions sources by 2030.

It also underlined the need to slash global energy intensity, measured by the quantity of energy per unit of gross domestic product (GDP).

Currently, some 3 billion people worldwide rely on traditional biomass for cooking and heating, resulting in adverse health effects if used in inadequately ventilated buildings, with 1.6 billion having no access to electricity.

“This is why we are looking at launching a worldwide campaign to ensure that access to modern energy services no longer represents a barrier to development,” Mr. Yumkella said. “A reliable, affordable energy supply is the key to economic growth and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs],” the eight anti-poverty targets with a 2015 deadline.

Private companies, he pointed out, already have the technology needed to make global energy systems less dependent on fossil fuels, while many governments are offering financial incentives and support for this transition.

“What we need today is to forge strong public-private partnerships to tackle these goals,” the UNIDO chief, who chairs the Advisory Group, said.

Today’s meeting, co-hosted by Mexican Energy Minister Georgina Kessel Martínez, drew top UN officials and business executives, while representatives of Sharp and other corporations presented some of the latest renewable technologies.

In a related development, a new report launched today by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) found that the United States and Europe have added more capacity to their electricity supplies from renewable sources, such as wind and solar, for the second consecutive year.

In 2009, renewables accounted for 60 per cent of newly-installed capacity in Europe and more than 50 per cent in the USA.

“The sustainable energy investment story of 2009 was one of resilience, frustration and determination,” said UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner.

The sector was able to weather the global financial downturn, but faced setbacks given that last December’s UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, did not achieve the targets that had been hoped for, he noted.

“Yet there was determination on the part of many industry actors and governments, especially in rapidly developing economies, to transform the financial and economic crisis into an opportunity for greener growth,” the official said.

* * *

TODAY’S GLOBAL CRISES HIGHLIGHT NEED TO PROMOTE HUMAN SECURITY – BAN.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has emphasized the need to promote the concept of human security, noting that the challenges facing the world today threaten the lives of millions and undermine development efforts.

“Everyone has a right to enjoy freedom from fear…freedom from want…and freedom to live in dignity,” Mr. Ban said in a video message for a symposium on human security taking place in Tokyo.

“These mutually reinforcing aspirations are at the heart of human security and our mission to build a better world for all,” he stated.

More than ever, “we live in an interconnected world,” where crises transcend borders and threaten the lives and livelihoods of millions of men, women and children, he noted.

“They increase human insecurity and undermine progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),” he added, referring to the targets world leaders have pledged to achieve by 2015, ranging from ensuring quality education and a clean environment to reducing hunger and disease.

He said the symposium can help inform and advance discussions at the high-level summit he will be convening in New York in September at which world leaders will gather to push for further progress on the MDGs.

The landmark 2005 World Summit referred to the concept of human security, recognizing that “that all individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to freedom from fear and freedom from want, with an equal opportunity to enjoy all their rights and fully develop their human potential.”

In May, the General Assembly held its first formal debate on human security, during which Mr. Ban presented his report on the issue.

Addressing that meeting, he had stressed that “we must ensure that the gains of today are not lost to the crises of tomorrow,” calling for actions focusing on “people-centred, comprehensive, context-specific and preventive strategies at every level.”

Such an approach, the report pointed out, helps address both current and emerging threats, as well as their causes. The report also emphasized the need for strong and stable institutions to advance human security.

 http://www.ipiworldcongress.com/singlevi…

INTERNATIONAL PRESS INSTITUTE (IPI)

WORLD CONGRESS – 2010 VIENNA & BRATISLAVA – September 11-14, 2010.

A topic that will be part of a panel discussion:

“Professional Journalism Is Being Devalued Whether We Like It or Not.”

Thursday, 15 July 2010

Jeff Howe, Coiner of the Term ‘Crowdsourcing’, Tells IPI Why Journalists Need To Face up To Change.

Louise Hallman

If history has taught us anything, it has taught us that things change. Ideas that were once innovative become commonplace, taken for granted and eventually obsolete.  Industries emerge, grow and are ultimately forced to adapt or collapse.

If we have seen such change in so many other industries – mining, car-making, banking –should we be surprised to see it happening in the news industry?

Harvard journalism fellow and writer Jeff Howe doesn’t think so – and yet is oft-criticised for his view: “The news industry, too, is subject to the forces of history, just as every other industry is.  Things change. Things fall apart…  Will we still be doing the same things in 50 years? No, because no other industry is going to be the same in 50 years either!  It’s not a radical proposition.”

Nonetheless, news organisations are still grappling with the change thrust upon them by the Internet. Many news outlets are finding themselves forced to make cut-backs to their professional staff.  According to the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism’s annual review of the America media landscape, 5,900 journalists lost their jobs in 2008 alone, more than double the number of 2,400 in 2007.

As news organisations struggle to maintain their position in the industry, executives have turned to much cheaper – or even free – means of creating content.  ‘Crowdsourcing’ – a term coined by Howe in an article for Wired magazine in 2006 – is just one of the latest buzzwords/innovations which media owners hope will provide them with some respite from what some see as an inevitable decline.

Crowdsourcing is, by Howe’s own definition, “the act of taking a job, generally performed by employees, and out-sourcing in the form of an open call to an undefined audience, generally using the Internet. And the crucial terms there are ‘open call’ and ‘undefined’, in that the essence of crowd-sourcing is a recognition that you don’t necessarily know who’s the best person to perform a task, or more to the point a whole collection of people might be able to perform a task.”

Howe’s term – which was invented to cover a whole host of businesses, and not just the news industry – has since taken on a life of its own, covering a multitude of free, collaborative efforts.

Speaking to the International Press Institute (IPI) ahead of his appearance on the panel “Found News? The New Platforms for Delivering Information” at the IPI World Congress in September, Howe stated that in journalism crowdsourcing has two different meanings: ‘reverse-publishing’ or ‘document-dumping’.

Reverse-publishing has been adopted across the media landscape at many different levels; from hyper-local projects such as Glasgow’s Evening Times mini-sites in Scotland, UK, where locals write their stories which if good enough are then published in the daily newspaper, to the likes of CNN’s iReport, where, once verified by a CNN editor, viewers’ own video footage and photographs can be broadcast on the international news channel.

Document-dumping, which is probably closer to Howe’s original notion, has become increasingly common as staff numbers have dwindled at news organisations.  For many newspapers, gone are the days when staff could be allocated enough time to pore over pages and pages of documents for an investigative report.  And in the era of the World Wide Web, why bother, when you can get a team of interested readers to do the work for you?

An example of document-dumping came last summer when, in the wake of the expenses scandal at the Houses of Parliament, the UK-based newspaper The Guardian uploaded 458,832 pages of documents to its website and invited its readers to “join us in digging through the documents of MPs’ expenses to identify individual claims, or documents that you think merit further investigation.”  The “best” individual discoveries were then collated online, enabling the Guardian’s own journalists to follow up and write thorough analyses for the newspaper and its website.  The project is so large that, although it was launched in June 2009, less than half of the documents have been reviewed online so far.

But are all these crowdsourcing efforts devaluing professional journalism?  Although he holds a positive outlook for the future of journalism, Howe agrees.

“Professional journalism is being devalued whether we like it or not,” he told IPI.  “In fact, it’s not as much being devalued as it is being ‘amatuerised’.

“There’s no point in newspapers sticking their heads in the sand and pretending that websites like Associated Content and Examiner.com aren’t out there paying people $1 per article or even using computer algorithms to create news articles … . So whether we like it or not the basic news article has become a commodity, and a really cheap commodity at that.”

However, despite the growing presumption that anyone can write a news story, Howe remains passionate about journalism, and believes there will still be a place for good, solid reporting.

“A good source network is as valuable as it’s ever been,” he said. “An algorithm can’t find a whistleblower within a Verizon or a big pharmaceutical company.”

{my God – how wrong he is, granted the algorithm will not find the whistleblower – neither will the classic newspaper – it is only the internet that can find the whistleblower – this because it is known that a classic newspaper, burdened with financial ties to institutions and businesses, will not publicize what that whistleblower tells them – so he will not tell it to the conventional press. See this at the UN – it is only the few bloggers left in the house of the UN that get the real scoops – not any kind of major Press does it!}

Among the most radical of Howe’s views is the belief that in the not so distant future, the term ‘journalist’ may have ceased to exist.

“To tell you the truth, and I know it’ll sound pretty radical to a bunch of journalists, but I think we do ourselves a disservice by calling ourselves ‘journalists’,” he said.

“People who can access information that other people can’t access, that other people are willing to pay for, and if they can compose it in a fashion that is entertaining, illuminating, compelling – those people are always going to find work.  We can call it journalism, but I don’t know for how much longer – maybe the next 40 years we’ll still have something call journalism…

“I just think we can love and admire what is at the heart of journalism without being beholden to the word, which is to say we’re beholden to a set of conventions… We really get lost in the name. We all decide that we’re going to adhere to the conventions instead of what is at the root of those conventions, which is the idea that truly being the Fourth Estate, serving the public interest, creating beautiful things like bits of prose and beautiful video and audio, educating people and making their lives more interesting and richer – that’s what we should be worried about!”

Perhaps he’s right.  If the root of the conventions stays the same, perhaps the term by which we refer to those who adhere to those conventions will change. After all, the term ‘journalism’ only dates back to the 1800s, but newspapers have existed in some format for over 1000 years, with the bulletins in Roman times and 7^th century China. Even the term ‘newspaper’ only dates back to the 1600s. Who knows what we will be calling ourselves in 25, 50, 100 or 500 years?

But in the shorter term, as the editors, publishers and leading journalists of today gather in Vienna in September for the IPI World Congress, to debate whether we are losing the news, Howe is hoping for one thing: “Knowledge transfer. One thing alone, it would be great to get Americans to realize that newspapers are flourishing in countries like India!

“Are we losing the news? I don’t know, but hopefully people will come to a Congress like this and realize that the answer is very complex.”

Jeff Howe is a contributing editor at Wired Magazine, where he covers the media and entertainment industry, among other subjects. In 2006, he published “The Rise of Crowdsourcing” in Wired. He is also a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University and teaches a course entitled “The Independent Journalist in the Digital Age”.  Howe will appear on the “Found News? The New Platforms for Delivering Information” panel in September alongside Hannes Ametsreiter, CEO of Telekom Austria Group, Josh Cohen, Senior Business Product Manager at Google News and Rajesh Kalra, Chief Editor at Times Internet Ltd in India.  The panel will be moderated by Errol Barnett, presenter of CNN’s iReport.

—————-

That was then

Photo: Reuters / Reuters Newsroom (1950)

This is change if the old media likes it or not. In the end the computers win over the typewriters – we bet!

This is now

Photo: Reuters / Reuters newsroom in London (2007)

 http://www.modul.ac.at/pgm/msc?gclid=CLP…

Master of Science in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy

Study in a Unique Multidisciplinary Environment

The Master of Science (MSc) degree programs* at MODUL University Vienna offer a unique multidisciplinary approach, working with research teams from three different departments: public governance and management, tourism and hospitality management and new media technology. Our research and teaching staff actively participate in international scholarly and professional networks and are at the forefront of their field, which enables us to bring you right to the heart of scientific practice.

Are you interested in studying the principles of sustainable development and understanding the impact of environmental policies on local communities and international businesses or the impact of economic development policies on environmental quality? Do you want to investigate what policies can be implemented to reduce environmental impacts in the tourism production chain? Do you want to understand to what extent the success of local environmental policy depends on civic participation in policy making? The future world needs people with comprehensive knowledge of both environmental and development issues to provide leadership for our local and global communities.
As a MU Vienna Master of Science graduate, you will be able to address the globalization and sustainability challenges of this millennium.

As a graduate of the MSc in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy you will be qualified for positions as consultants, scientists, policy advisors, program coordinators and environmental marketing specialists at research institutes, in government, in globally presented companies or at NGOs all over the world. In addition, the MSc degree prepares students for a subsequent PhD program. For further information, see the folder for the MSc programs.

Strenghts of the Study Program

• Studying in a multi-disciplinary research environment with an emphasis on critical thinking and the application of specialist knowledge to the challenges of the 21st century
• Understanding the emergent trends and key management issues by empowering the analytical skills of students
• The open atmosphere at MU guarantees the best support for writing the master thesis

Facts & Figures

Admission Criteria

• Admission to this master program is granted to persons who have completed at least the equivalent of a bachelor’s or diploma degree, and ideally can demonstrate their research skills and their basic knowledge of the natural and/or social sciences.
• A suitable preparation for the MSc in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy might include courses from among physics, geology, technical sciences, biology, geography, earth sciences, planning, sociology, policy sciences, law, management, or economics. Selection will be based upon transcripts of courses and grades taken at previous universities and other educational organizations.
• All candidates whose native language is not English and who have not graduated from an undergraduate program conducted in English are required to provide proof of proficiency in the English language by showing that they have passed one of the tests below or by satisfying the Admissions Committee in a form deemed appropriate by the Committee:
  - TOEFL (570 PBT or 230 CBT or 88 IBT) or
  - IELTS 5.5 (no sub-score under 5.0)
• MODUL University Vienna reserves the right to request that individual applicants submit TOEFL or IELTS scores, even if they have attended a secondary school conducted in English, to ensure their English skills meet the expected academic level.
• CV and motivation letter

Credit transfer applications must be submitted together with the admissions documents.

The Admission Committee will make decision on a case-by-case basis to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for admission. The admission committee decides on:

• Type of acceptance (full acceptance / conditional acceptance)
• If credits are transferred to the program
• Merit scholarships
• Additional courses that need to be taken by candidates who do not fulfill all requirements for entering the program

For further information on the admissions process, please contact admissions@modul.ac.at.

* Degree programs are subject to accreditation by the Austrian Accreditation Council.

Attachment
Application Form MSc Programs.pdf
Facts_MSc_Programs.pdf ——————————————————— ———————————————————- Study Abroad Cooperations MODUL University Vienna’s Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management maintains exchange agreements with many institutions. For general information on the exchange programs please contact the International Officer at the Student Service Center.  http://www.modul.ac.at/study_abroad among the list of such institutions is also included the - City University of New York, USA The City University of New York (CUNY) is the largest urban public university in the USA and also offers a program in Hospitality Management. An exchange program is under development. ——————————————————- Contact Admission Services For information for prospective students, please contact: Admission Services Address: Am Kahlenberg 1 1190 Wien, Austria Tel.: +43 1 320 3555-202 Fax: +43 1 320 3555-902 E-Mail: admissions@modul.ac.at University Communication Office For information on press and media material as well as for journalistic inquiries, please contact: University Communication Office Address: Am Kahlenberg 1 1190 Wien, Austria Tel.: +43 1 320 3555-104 Fax: +43 1 320 3555-902 E-Mail: andreas.eder@modul.ac.at ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Appetit auf Sardinen ?????

Freedom of The Media in a ‘News-for-Free’ Age.

Josh Cohen, Google News

Google News & The Race Down the Information Highway. In this week’s newsletter, we bring you an interview with two of our panellists – Josh Cohen, Senior Business Product Manager at Google News and Susan Pointer, Director of Public Policy & Government Relations for Southern and Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa at Google. Cohen will be featuring on our “Found News? The New Platforms for Delivering Information” panel.

Susan Pointer, Google

We asked him and Pointer about Google News’ and Google’s role in the media as well as its commitment to freedom of information.

Here are a few of the highlights:

Cohen, on the perceived clash between Google News and newspaper publishers:

It’s a misunderstanding of how Google News works. We absolutely do not see publishers as competitors to what we’re trying to do. To the contrary, it’s very much a symbiotic relationship. We help people discover the information that all these sites produce… where they have the opportunity to monetise it.

…We absolutely honour and respect copyright. We never show, whether it’s on news or a web search, anything more than a snippet, the first sentence or in many cases the headline – and a link to the source itself.

————————————————

Pointer, on Google’s role in censorship:

We believe that more access to information is better than less access to information… Access to information is a good thing. Freedom to express oneself and exchange ideas and content is a good thing.

That obviously doesn’t come without limits.

———————————————–

What do you think?

And don’t forget to join us in September at our World Congress in Vienna and Bratislava!

Haven’t registered yet?

It’s not too late. Register before 1 July and you’ll save money on our registration fee, and get the best hotel rates and a free, signed copy of our commemorative 60 World Press Freedom Heroes book. Check out the benefits with our latest offer here.

Ways to Register

Give us a call and we will take care of your registration for you!
Phone: + 431 512  90 11

Download the form, fill it in and send it back to us.
Fax: + 431-512 90 14    Email: cklint(at)freemedia.at

Or simply click here and register online!

Questions?

Contact us:
Tel: +43 1 512 90 11    Fax: + 43 1 512 90 14   E: ipi(at)freemedia.at

Web: www.ipiworldcongress.com & www.freemedia.at

Twitter: IPI_WoCo2010 & globalfreemedia;  Facebook

The UN may even do good things once in a while – but then its Department of Public Information hides them from the world at large by not opening its doors to the interested media. Those they invite are  those that are not interested in publicizing suggestions that can work when the world is called to disengage from its addiction to oil.

The following is a positive in the UNDP cap but when we asked to be invited to participate in the following Press Conference we did not even get the honor of a reply. So much about the UN – but we promise nevertheless to honor our readers by covering the issues even if the UN DPI prefers we did not exist. As we are busy today with the New York Forum, we will approach Mr. Olav Kjorven at a later date in order to cover at length the case of Nepal and other work under his leadership.
We told him in the past that his words will not get world distribution if presented only via the UN DPI chanel.

Now we post the information we received so our readers can have the appropriate links right away.

—————————

UNDP SAYS — Clean energy access in Nepal possible model for acceleration of progress towards MDGs:
Early investment in capacity development crucial to success.

As the 2010 MDG Summit approaches, UNDP’s on-the-ground experience in providing access to clean energy indicates a promising way of stepping-up progress towards achieving the MDGs. Currently, almost half of humanity —3 billion people— are energy poor. They live without access to modern energy for lighting, cooking, heating and mechanical power. For 250,000 people in remote rural communities in Nepal, this has changed.

What: Briefing at the UN DPI Briefing Room for which special DPI accreditation is required – on an effective energy programme that can help alleviate poverty and improve lives of poor communities around the world.

Who:               Olav Kjorven, UNDP Director of Policy and UN Assistant Secretary-General

H.E. Mr. Gyan Chandra Acharya, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Nepal Mission to the UN

Kiran Man Singh, Project Manager, Rural Energy Development Programme

When: Tuesday, 22 June, 15.00 – 15.45

Where:            Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium

Through a pioneering partnership between UNDP and the Government of Nepal, the installation of micro-hydro plants has given them access to clean energy, creating jobs and incomes, opportunities for women and girls and improved school enrollment, among other benefits. Fundamental to this success has been the early investment in capacity development —in other words, helping people in the national government and in the communities themselves develop the knowledge, skills, institutions and regulatory environment needed for the emergence of both local demand for energy services and a local supply.

Nepal is now expanding the programme to bring energy to tens of millions of people. Kenya and other countries are interested in applying the same strategy. The approach could help accelerate progress towards the MDG’s and achieve the universal access to modern energy services by 2030, as proposed by the Secretary-General’s Advisory Group on Energy and Climate Change.

*** *** ****

Hard copies of the report “Capacity development for scaling up decentralized energy access programmes” will be made available at the briefing, and will also be available later today at http://www.undp.org/energy.

Media queries: Please contact Charles Dickson of UNDP’s Environment and Energy Group at charles.dickson@undp.org or 212-906-6041.

Panel Discussion und Präsentation des EU Projekts “SustainergyNet”

Zivilgesellschaft und
Nachhaltige Energie in Afrika

Im Rahmen des EU Projekts SustainergyNet hat ein Konsortium aus europäischen und afrikanischen Partnerinstitutionen, dem auch das oiip und IDC (Organisation for International Dialogue and Conflict Management) angehört, zwei Jahre lang Wege, Chancen und Möglichkeiten erarbeitet, um die Zusammenarbeit von zivilgesellschaftlichen, wissenschaftlichen und politischen AkteurInnen zur Förderung Nachhaltiger Energie und Entwicklung in Afrika zu stärken.
ReferentInnen:

Gudrun LETTMAYER, Joanneum Research

“Was kann ‘nachhaltig’ im sozialen Sinn bei Projekten Erneuerbarer Energie bedeuten?”

Gerhard MAIR

“Umeme Kwa Wote. Nachhaltige Energienutzung im SUBA District, Kenia”

Angela MEYER und Gregor GIERSCH, IDC

Präsentation von SustainergyNet

Begrüßung – Otmar HÖLL, oiip
Im Anschluss kleines Buffet

Donnerstag, 24. Juni 2010

17:30 Uhr

oiip
Berggasse 7, 1090 Vienna
Programm und weitere Informationen über das EU-Projekt

im Namen des Österreichischen Instituts für Internationale Politik - oiip
möchte Sie auf folgende Veranstaltung aufmerksam machen:

Das Renner-Institut und ACUNS (Academic Council of the United Nations System)
laden ein zum Vortrag

UN-REFORM: A NEVER ENDING STORY.

Begrüßung

KARL A. DUFFEK, Direktor des Renner-Instituts
MICHAEL PLATZER, ACUNS

Vortrag
DAME MARGARET JOAN ANSTEE, Direktorin der Organisation CROSE

Dame Margaret Joan Anstee war vier Jahrzehnte hindurch für die Vereinten Nationen tätig (1952-93). Sie war an der Entwicklung und Umsetzung mehrerer großer Reformen des UN-Systems maßgeblich beteiligt und arbeitete für verschiedene UNDP-Programme zur wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Entwicklung in allen Regionen der Welt. 1987 wurde sie als erste Frau stellvertretende UN-Generalsekretärin und war von 1987-1992 Generaldirektorin des UNO-Sitzes in Wien, Leiterin des Zentrums für Soziale und Humanitäre Entwicklung sowie Koordinatorin der Drogenkontroll-Programme der UN. 1992-1993 war Anstee als Sonderbeauftragte des UN-Generalsekretärs als erste Frau Leiterin einer UN-Friedensmission in Angola . Neben umfassender Lehrtätigkeit ist sie auch Autorin zahlreicher Publikationen, u.a. von Büchern über Angola (1996), Bolivien (2009), sowie ihrer autobiografischen Erfahrungen während ihrer langen UN-Karriere: “Never Learn to Type: A Woman at the United Nations” (2004).

Vortrag in englischer Sprache mit Simultanübersetzung

Montag, 7. Juni 2010
19.00 Uhr

Renner-Institut, Europa-Saal
Eingang: Gartenhotel Altmannsdorf - Hotel 2,

Hoffingergasse 33 (Ecke Oswaldgasse), 1120 Wien

nähere Information

Anmeldung ausschließlich unter:
Renner-Institut
T 01-804 65 01

post@renner-institut.at
Mag. Daniela Härt
Österreichisches Institut für Internationale Politik – oiip
Berggasse 7
A-1090 Wien
Tel. +43(0)1/581 11 06*11
Fax. +43(0)1/581 11 06*10
Email: haertl@oiip.at
——————

Website: http://www.oiip.at

from Kreisky Forum <kreiskyforum@kreisky.org> date Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:35 AM subject Einladung zu James K. Galbraith, The Necessary Future of Social Democracy, Montag, 14. Juni

Reihe: GENIAL DAGEGEN/ kuratiert von Robert Misik

Monday, June 14, 2010, 7.00 p.m.

JAMES K. GALBRAITH

Lloyd M. Bentsen Chair in Government and Business Relations and Professor of Economics

Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, University of Texas

THE NECESSARY FUTURE OF SOCIAL DEMOCRACY

Moderator:

Robert Misik, journalist and author

Welcome address:

Franz Vranitzky, former Chancellor

Bruno Kreisky Forum for international Dialogue | Armbrustergasse 15 | 1190 Wien

R.s.v.p.: Tel.: 3188260/20 | Fax: 318 82 60/10 | e-mail: einladung.kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

James K. Galbraith is currently the Lloyd M. Bentsen Chair in Government and Business Relations and Professor of Economics at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. He holds degrees from Harvard (B.A. magna cum laude, 1974) and Yale (Ph.D. in economics, 1981).

He studied economics as a Marshall Scholar at King’s College, Cambridge in 1974-1975, and then served in several positions on the staff of the U.S. Congress, including as the Executive Director of the Joint Economic Committee. He was a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution in 1985 before joining the faculty at the University of Texas. From 1995 to 1997 he directed the LBJ School’s Ph.D. Program in Public Policy.  He held a Fulbright Distinguished Visiting Lectureship in China in the summer of 2001 and was named a Carnegie Scholar in 2003.

His recent research has focused on the measurement and understanding of inequality in the world economy, and leads an informal research group called the University of Texas Inequality Project with several of the school’s distinguished graduate students.

Dr. Galbraith maintains several outside connections, including serving as a Senior Scholar of the Levy Economics Institute and as Chair of the Board of Economists for Peace and Security. He writes a column for Mother Jones, and occasional commentary in many other publications, including The Texas Observer, The American Prospect, and The Nation. He is an occasional commentator for Public Radio International’s Marketplace.

Galbraith’s new book is The Predator State: How Conservatives Abandoned the Free Market and Why Liberals Should Too (2008). He is also author of Balancing Acts: Technology, Finance and the American Future (1989) and Created Unequal: The Crisis in American Pay (1998). Inequality and Industrial Change: A Global View (Cambridge University Press, 2001), is coedited with Maureen Berner and features contributions from six LBJ School Ph.D. students. He has co-authored two textbooks, The Economic Problem with the late Robert L. Heilbroner and Macroeconomics with William Darity, Jr.

Karin Mendel
Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue
1190 Vienna, Armbrustergasse 15
Tel: +43-(0)1-3188260
Fax: +43-(0)1-3188260/10
www.kreisky-forum.org

From the UN Association of Austria – the students and young professionals division, and  the –

Academic Forum for Foreign Affairs  AFA that is represented all over Austria and has a federal structure with the AFA- AUSTRIA and its local branches in GRAZ, INNSBRUCK, KLAGENFURT, LINZ, …