Ahim Steiner says Natural Disaster Underlines Serious Environmental
Change Challenge
Emerging Across Planet.

NAIROBI, 30 August 2010 – Achim Steiner, the head of the UN Environment
Programme (UNEP), has donated a $70,000 international leadership prize to
relief efforts in Pakistan following the devastating and ongoing floods, it
was announced today.

Mr. Steiner, who called on others to also assist the victims and support
the humanitarian efforts in Pakistan, was awarded the 2010 Tällberg
Foundation prize at a ceremony in Stockholm on Sunday evening for
“principled pragmatism” and “leadership that walks the talk”.

The value of the award, whose previous winners include former Norwegian
Prime Minister Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, is 500,000 Swedish Krona or close
to $70,000.

Mr. Steiner, who is also a UN Under-Secretary-General, began his
professional career working in the villages of Pakistan’s
Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa Province.

He said he had “been deeply touched not only by the scale of the disaster
but also the extraordinary efforts of local communities and organizations
in mobilizing relief efforts while support from the international community
was being deployed”.

Mr. Steiner announced to the audience that he would immediately transfer
the funds to the Sarhad Rural Support Programme — a national NGO which has
mobilized a vital flood relief and rehabilitation effort for the affected
communities in the Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa Province during the past weeks.

The funds will be deployed with a focus on rehabilitation and
reconstruction projects for communities returning to rebuild their lives
and livelihoods.

In his acceptance speech at the award ceremony Mr. Steiner called for a
spirit of solidarity and generosity to assist the people of Pakistan at
this time of crisis.

He also emphasized that while the immediate response and needs of people
should be the focus of our attention the nature and scale of this disaster
also provided a stark reminder of the need to address the causes and
consequences of environmental change on our planet.

“The vulnerability of societies – particularly the poor – to the impacts of
these change phenomena such as climate change and degradation of our
ecological life support systems continues to grow”, Mr. Steiner emphasized.

“The world deserves better answers at a time when we have the knowledge and
ability to make better choices for the future. No one can be left untouched
by the looks of despair, confusion and fear in the eyes of trusting
children being carried by their parents through flooded landscapes in the
desperate search for a safe place. Our responsibility to reflect and act
has never been greater.” The Foundation described Mr. Steiner as a
“systems thinker and doer, integrating cultures, disciplines and sectors in
the pursuit of a sustainable environment for all”. They cited his
leadership in launching UNEP’s Green Economy Initiative as leaving
indelible marks in international and national policy.

In a statement, the Tällberg Foundation said: “Achim Steiner has shown an
unusual capacity for listening to the needs and views of disparate
communities, Governments, business, academia, civil society and integrating
these into policies which have frequently been implemented. His masterful
leadership at the IUCN and the World Commission on Dams paved way for his
nomination to lead UNEP.”

Tällberg Foundation Leadership Award — www.Tällbergfoundation.org

The Award is given to an individual who has consistently applied
humanistic, social and ecological values in his/her pursuit of results. The
prize thus encourages and supports the leadership that combines the
articulation of consistent values and positive results – the essence of
principled pragmatism.  The prize consists of a diploma and a contribution
of 500,000 Swedish Kroner (SEK) to the recipient’s charity of choice.  The
contribution of 500,000 SEK is made possible by the generous support of
Svenska PostkodLotteriet.

Previous recipients:
* Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Prime Minister, Norway (2009)
* Kofi Annan, President, Global Humanitarian Forum, Geneva and former
Secretary-General, United Nations, New York (2008)
* Lord John Browne of Madingley, former Group Chief Executive, BP, United
Kingdom (2006)
* Russell Ackoff, Chairman, Interact, USA (2005)

For more information, please contact: Nick Nuttall, UNEP Spokesperson and
Head of Media, on Tel: +254-733-632755 or E-mail: nick.nuttall@unep.org

I saw the show tonight and it made me think of Eric Falt who worked at UNEP then became #2 at UN DPI in New York where he replaced an Egyptian and is taking over the #2 job at UNESCO.

Why that? It is because DRIVING THE SAUDIS was conceived in cooperation with The International Theatre Institute of Paris that is connected to UNESCO. This means that there is still some honesty left at UNESCO – something impossible to find at the  Department of Information and Communication of the UN in New York. Under Egyptian Ahmad Fawzi the Department was all about safeguarding the interests of the oil kings. Under French Eric Falt there was no change – only a make believe of bringing in the UN Correspondents Association in decision making and the results are even worse then the starting line. What will he do when he gets to Paris? Will activities like showing DRIVING THE SAUDIS in conjunction with ITI be considered not Halal anymore?

My first posting about this one woman show was based on their publicity and I thought that the waste of oil money by the oil kings is the main issue. Having seen it now my feeling is that it is much more about the place of a woman in the Saudi Royal family.

Actually – there is no Saudi State only a privately owned huge piece of real estate that belonged to King Ibn Saud and was passed on to his descendants that multiply like rabbits – with 30 wives if not one hundred. We understood that there are only 4 at one time and they are released simply by saying three times, in the presence of a witness,  that the owner sends them off. The whole thing turned my stomach and what is the UN for? What is a the new “UN Women” creation for? What did UNIFEM do all these years? Who at the UN has said anything about this sort of slavery at the age that overpopulation does us all in. A woman must produce sons in order to have a chance to survive some longer before being replace by a younger one.

I clearly will not do justice in this second posting to the content of this reality play – and reality it is in every minute of it – in the real sense of the word. I will write more about it and hope it will get to the public’s attention and people will not shy away anymore from what it presents. The UN Headquarters are not worth the money the world spends on it if no effort is made to follow up on 21st century slavery – even if the women involved think that they benefit from the lavish life-style as long as it lasts.

————–

The New York Fringe Festival is the largest multi-arts festival in North America, with more than 200 companies from all over the world performing for 16 days in more than 20 venues.

DRIVING THE SAUDIS, with and by Jayne Amelia Larson, was [performed at the historic SoHo Playhouse and was about 2/3 full. Those that came early – about 50 people – looked to me as Middle Easterners. Those that arrived closer to the start were younger and looked like theater students.

The SoHo Playhouse was home to playwrights like Edward Albee, Terrance McNally, A.R. Gurney … Previously it was under the Village South & Spectrum Theatre name, and even housed at the start of the last century the Tammany Hall (New York City Democrats Hall) “Huron Club.”

I met the producer of the play – Patrick Terry – who hails from the NYU Tisch School of the Arts (Drama and Production) and is connected to Peter Goldfarb, Vice President of UN’s International Theatre Institute. From Terry I learned that the content of the play will be gathered also in a book form.

Again, getting back to the history of the play, both, Larson and Terry said that it is all true. Larson who is a theater person, director, actress, in her own right, for money reasons took on this job of being part of a group of 15 drivers that were serving a family of 7 Saudi Royals and their entourage of 50 that includes cooks, nannies, security, secretaries …, that came to Los Angeles for aesthetic surgery and shopping that lasted 50 days. They were spread out in 4 hotels. When she got the job to be chauffeuring the princess and her daughter, it turned out that she had to chauffeur also the hairdresser to Las Vegas. The family came with $20 million and that money was spent. The help had to leave their passports with the hired ex-American military and one of the help, from Sudan, at the airport, when she got the passport in her hands, simply ran away and refused to board the private 747 for the return trip to Saudi Arabia.

Larson digs into the social implications of what she saw and learned. She has sympathy for the three women she talks about – the princess, her daughter that would have loved to go to UCLA but was already promised in marriage, and a Lebanese nanny that with her earnings put through college her siblings back in Lebanon. She speaks of the men as always in need to have someone to insult bellow them in the pecking order. The men never looked into he eyes and this seemingly in an attempt to show respect. And yes – when she applied for the job, she was interviewed and there was no question about her driving only if she was not Jewish. (“You are not Jewish? Not Jewish!”)

Oh yes, I will have more on this in further postings.

‘Son of Hamas’ warns U.S. fatally falling for lies

‘Peaceful’ Muslims following Quran’s dictate to establish ‘global Islamic state’

CAIR, casting itself as a human rights organization, has often been called on by government and media to represent Muslims in the U.S. But it’s origin as a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas is now widely documented, including in the WND Books best-selling expose “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America”

CAIR and some of its leaders were confirmed by the Justice Department as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation, which was convicted of helping fund Hamas. An FBI letter to lawmakers in April 2009 explained the bureau suspended all formal contacts with CAIR because of evidence the group was founded as a front in the U.S. for Hamas. Among numerous government relationships, CAIR leaders had regular meetings with top FBI brass on security issues and helped lead FBI Muslim “sensitivity training” sessions.

At the Holy Land Foundation trial, the FBI presented a transcript from a wiretap of a 1993 meeting in Philadelphia in which Hamas supporters sought to establish Muslim organizations in the U.S. “whose Islamic hue is not very conspicuous.” CAIR was soon founded by two Palestinian participants in the Philadelphia meeting, Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad.

The Fox News Channel’s Martha MacCallum with CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad

Wiretaps revealed Ahmad argued for using Muslims as an “entry point” to “pressure Congress and the decision makers in America” to change U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. One FBI official quoted in “Muslim Mafia” says CAIR and the other Muslim Brotherhood front groups differ from al-Qaida only in their methods.

“The only difference between the guys in the suits and the guys with the AK-47s is timing and tactics,” the official explained.

CAIR, meanwhile – which has more than a dozen former and current leaders with known associations with violent jihad – is trying to keep alive a lawsuit against WND and two investigators behind “Muslim Mafia.”

While CAIR repeatedly has denied it receives foreign support, the covert operation that produced “Muslim Mafia” obtained video footage that captured CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper boasting of his ability to bring in a half million dollars of “overseas money,” including from Saudi Arabia.

Money continues to flow in the other direction, as well, Yousef said.

He noted the FBI documented that the Holy Land Foundation sent $12.4 million from the U.S. to Hamas committees. But based on his 10 years of experience as a spy for the Israeli internal security service Shin Bet, he believes many times that amount has been smuggled to Hamas in cash.

As an example, Yousef cited the case of a Palestinian terror operative he met in prison who was arrested transporting $100,000 after Shin Bet provided information to law enforcement authorities.

“I guarantee you that there still people who collect money in mosques that go directly to Hamas in cash,” Yousef said. “And this is a problem that the government doesn’t have control over. Obama doesn’t have control over this money.”

‘Hamas is the Muslim Brotherhood’

Hamas itself was formed in 1987 as part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy to advance the movement by spinning off new organizations, Yousef said.

“If they have a confrontation with Israel as the Muslim Brotherhood, they are going to pay a very high price,” he explained. “So they choose people like my father, from the Muslim Brotherhood originally, and they ask them to establish an independent movement that shares the same exact doctrine.”

As WND reported, Yousef worked alongside his father, Sheik Hassan Yousef, in the West Bank city of al-Ghaniya near Ramallah while secretly embracing Christian faith and serving as a Shin Bet spy. Since publicly declaring his faith in August 2008, he has been condemned by an al-Qaida-affiliated group and disowned by his family.

The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in the 1920s in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Turkish empire, considers itself an instrument of the charge Muslims have been given since Islam’s founding 1,400 years ago – to make the Quran and Allah’s authority supreme over the entire world.

Along with CAIR, prominent U.S. organizations launched by Muslim Brotherhood leaders include the Muslim Students Association, North American Islamic Trust, the Islamic Society of North America, the American Muslim Council, the Muslim American Society and the International Institute of Islamic Thought.

Yousef said, “we have to ask ourselves all the time, what is the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood? Ask them, ‘What do you want?’”

He said the Muslim Brotherhood “will keep the hope and the ultimate goal very clear in the eyes of every Muslim who belongs to the organization that one day [we will] establish an Islamic state and establish Shariah law.”

In unusually candid moments, CAIR leaders have expressed that aim.

CAIR founder Ahmad was reported telling a Muslim group in the San Francisco Bay area that Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant and that the Quran should become the highest authority in America and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth. CAIR spokesman Hooper indicated in a 1993 interview with the Minneapolis Star Tribune he wants to see the U.S. become a Muslim country “through education.”

The West, Yousef said, has fallen for the “lie” that there are two types of Islam, radical and moderate. While there may be individual Muslims who are radical or moderate, Islam itself is not moderate, he contends.

“Let’s learn what Islam says about itself,” Yousef said. “Forget about what the Muslim Brotherhood, what al-Qaida, what Hezbollah – what even Americans or Westerners say about Islam. Let’s study and see what Islam says about itself, then we will understand why we have this problem.”

‘Buying the lie’

American foreign policy, especially under President Obama, he said, has “bought the lie of Muslim groups who are trying to make Islam look good in the eyes of Westerners.”

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf

Because of that approach, he said, Muslim leaders such as Feisal Abdul Rauf have developed “the courage to come forward with a very aggressive symbol” of Islamic authority, the proposed Islamic center and mosque near the site of the 2001 World Trade Center attacks.

“If it was any other American president, we wouldn’t have this aggressive step,” Yousef contended.

He noted the State Department has designated Rauf an ambassador to the Muslim world despite the imam’s unwillingness to condemn Hamas as a terrorist group.

“Of course, he cannot condemn Hamas, because he knows that Hamas is an organization that is doing the will of Allah,” Yousef said. “How can he condemn an organization that serves the same god that he worships every day five times?”

Yousef pointed out Rauf  has claimed Obama based his highly publicized Cairo speech to the Muslim world last year on a chapter from the Arabic version of Rauf’s book, “A Call to Prayer From the World Trade Center: Islamic Dawah in the Heart of America Post-9/11.” Obama asserted in the speech that violent extremists have exploited tensions between Muslims and the West, insisting Islam was not part of the problem but part of promoting peace.

‘This is the red line’

Mosab Hassan Yousef

Defenders of the proposed Ground Zero mosque cite American Muslims’ First Amendment freedoms to practice their religion.

But Yousef makes a distinction between Islam and other religions, arguing Islam is a subversive system that threatens America’s very existence.

“Even if it’s a religion, and 1.5 billion people around the world believe in it, this doesn’t mean that they are right; and this doesn’t mean that we compromise with them,” he said. “We tell them, ‘You’re accepted, but guess what? This is the red line: We don’t compromise with your god. We don’t compromise with your belief system.’”

Yousef reasoned that he certainly would not be allowed to create a religion in which he demanded that his followers kill everyone who doesn’t embrace his beliefs.

“Will I be able to register this religion here and build my symbols for this religion in this country?” he asked. “I will go to jail for that – and all my followers as well.”

‘A matter of life and death’

No one in the Middle East has the courage or the power to confront Islam, he said, but transformation can start in the most powerful country in the world.

“Instead of giving Islam credit, this is the country where we can start to fight – not against Muslims, against the bad teachings of Islam.”

Americans can begin, he said, by “understanding the real nature of Islam.”

“I am telling you, this is not a matter of politics,” he said. “It’s a matter of life and death. It’s a matter of hundreds of millions who have been killed because of this deadly ideology of Islam that has been here 1,400 years.”

Mosab Hassan Yousef in 2008 interview with Al-Hayat TV (Middle East Media Research Institute)

“This is the time” to speak out, he said, “especially here in America. This is the time to stand firm and strong against this crazy, big system.”

Yousef said that while some may want to “scare people about Islam” for some kind of financial or personal profit, he is speaking out because of his concern for America and as “a person who loves my people.”

“I cannot wait for them to be liberated,” he said of his fellow Palestinians and Muslims worldwide. “And when I see the example of liberty and freedom in this country, I want this to go to my people.”

If America leads the way in confronting Islam, change can come, he said.

“But if the country of liberty and freedom welcomes a radical and violent belief that wants to destroy everything, we won’t be able to defeat them,” he said.

“This is why we need to work all together. This is not for America only. This is for the world. This is for the future of humanity.”

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

To the above, please add the news in the press that the opposition in Egypt is uniting with Mohammad El Baradei making now common front with The Muslim Brotherhood. Then see the arming by France and Russia of the weak Lebanese army and the Syrian army with the high chance that some of the arms will end up with the Syrian directly sponsored pro-Brotherhood groups. What is by now forgotten is that once, under President Nasser of Egypt – Syria, Egypt, and Iraq (one star, two stars, three stars on their flags) were supposed to unite and form the kernel of the new Arab Islamic Nation. In this context what do you think of the arming of Saudi Arabia by the US? How will fault line develop? Is this doable?

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Israel, U.S. Seek to Block French Anti-Tank Missile Sale to Lebanon (Jerusalem Post)
Israel and the U.S. are attempting to prevent a French-Lebanese arms deal, the Arabic daily Asharq al-Awsat reported Friday.
French Defense Minister Herve Moran offered to sell Lebanon 100 HOT anti-tank missiles for the Gazelle helicopters already in use by the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF).
Washington has grown increasingly skittish over arming the Lebanese military amid concerns that the LAF may become engaged in a fight with Israel, an American ally, or be co-opted by the terrorist group Hizbullah.
See also European Anti-Tank Missiles Effective Against Explosive Reactive Armor (army-technology.com)
HOT is a long-range anti-tank mi ssile that can be operated from a vehicle or helicopter.
The HOT 3 has a 6.5 kg. tandem charge warhead which is effective against Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA), penetrating up to 1,300 mm.
When the missile reaches the target, the forward charge is ejected, which explodes, detonating the ERA. After a delay, the main charge then explodes.

---

Israel Working to Thwart Russian Arms Deal with Syria – Barak Ravid (Ha’aretz)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has asked Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to stop the sale to Syria of advanced anti-ship missiles.
Israel considers the sale of P-800 Yakhont supersonic cruise missiles to Syria a significant danger to its navy vessels in the Mediterranean Sea.
Netanyahu told Putin that missiles Russia had delivered to Syria in the past were then transferred to Hizbullah and used against IDF troops during the Second Lebanon War.
The highly accurate P-800 has a maximum range of 300 km., carries a 200-kg. warhead, and can cruise several meters above the surface, making it difficult to identify on radar.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Israeli-Palestinian Direct Talks and the Art of Low Expectations – Shmuel Rosner
The time may be right for the Obama administration, but it is hardly right for the parties involved. Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, think Iran is a more urgent priority. They believe the Palestinian problem can wait a little longer, and they see no Palestinian leaders they can make deals with. The Palestinian Authority and its president, Mahmoud Abbas, were dragged to these talks kicking and screaming, they don’t seem to intend to give an inch, and they have a hard time dealing with criticism from Hamas, Syria, and other regional belligerents. “There’s clearly a trust deficit that we’re going to have to find a way to overcome,” longtime special envoy Dennis Ross explained. When direct talks were finally announced, not all the Israeli newspapers bothered to carry the news on their front pages. Been there, done that. ( Slate)

{please read that article and see the ending}
.
.

There used to be a reason for setting low expectations. We were once told that low expectations lead to happiness. You lower your expectation in the hope that humility will help you achieve your goals. You lower your expectations hoping that you will be pleasantly surprised by a more positive outcome. But the Israeli-Palestinian peace process seems to be the outlier, the case in which low expectations have no role to play, no goal to serve, no hope to provide. In this case, low expectations seem to be just, well, a sober description of reality. In this case, the strategy of low expectations is just another casualty of this neverending conflict. And that is one good reason to want these talks to begin.

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.

Pakistan Flood Sets Back Years of Gains on Infrastructure.

CARLOTTA GALL, The New York Times.
Published: August 26, 2010.

Romania and Bulgaria keep low profile on Roma expulsions – 26.08.2010 -

Frank Lavin is now Chairman, Public Affairs, Asia Pacific, at Edelman – the largest PR company in the Asia-Pacific region. He previously was Under Secretary for International Trade at the US Department of Commerce and Ambassador to Singapore. In those capacities he was responsible for Trade agreements with China, India, Singapore – among his other imprint on US Asian commerce policy. Now he lives in Hong Kong.

When the US was in a position that there might not have been a US pavilion at this year’s -  six months long – May 1 to Oct 31, 2010 – World Fair in Shanghai, he volunteered to organize one with the help of business companies, and the friendly assistance of Secretary of State Hilary Clinton. Now he can look and say – we did it! It took him a mere one year to put up a respectable “Great Hall of the American People” pavilion.

This fair will have three times as many visitors as the New York World Fair and will be the largest ever in every respect – in size – number of countries exhibiting – 189, number of heads of State visiting 100. There are 240 pavilions that include 57 that are not by governments – such as IOs, NGOs, and businesses. 40 million visitors have already seen it by August 14th. It is expected that 60 million Chinese and 10 million foreigners, will have seen the Fair by the time it closes.

I found it extremely interesting that the Fair includes pavilions for Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao – very nice and non-controversial -  and the Chinese go and see them. Also interesting that in their statistics these lands are counted as foreign. I wonder how are displayed the Chinese provinces and how the competition between them is handled? Is a decentralized vuew of China allowed in the Chinese huge and very beautiful red and white Chinese pavilion?

The main item in the US pavilion is a film that shows a girl that sees through her window the need to plant a tree in order to beautify the neighborhood. This is a subtle way to tell the visitors – mainly Chinese – that with initiative and cooperation, one can change the world for the better. It is not a government, but the individual human spirit that does it. You learn that you are responsible for the environment and your actions count. The overall theme of this year’s Fair is “Better City , Better Life, so there is nothing revolutionary in the US story here except this interpretation that it calls for an individual response to environmental needs.

It is hoped that this will be appreciated by the average person in the region – the fact that the US did not come to toot its horn by showing off achievements of the past – the US makes rather attempts at cooperation with the Chinese in many areas of common interest. That reminded me of the G2 approach that President Obama initiated ahead of going to Copenhagen – now we see that it could also be a people’s action if people are ready to do what is right for their communities. Maybe we should recommend that Americans also go to see this US pavilion in Shanghai.

Asked what else he could have done for the pavilion, Frank Lavin said that besides the content for the 30 minutes he planed for there are several minutes of waiting time in line that could have been used. For the people in lines outside – there is entertainment that changes – visiting bands – so on. Several people in the Asia Society audience have already been to see the pavilion, quite a few more said that they are scheduled to go. Michael Roberts, Executive Director, New York Public Programs at Asia Society chaired the event.

This has become now a tradition – a tour of Jazz places/restaurants of Harlem during one of the evenings/nights of the yearly Harlem Week.
Obviously, this is a promotional thing – but if you want to find out what is going on – this is a tremendous one-time occasion.

We went by big Greyhound bus and several Greyhound employees went along. The “safari” was organized by Marko Nobles of Harlem Week Inc. and promoted through Rubenstein Adssociates Inc. Robin Verges. www.HarlemDiscover.com

We made 9 stops. I will not go over the tour chronologically, as it was very varied, but will touch upon the highlights.

Obviously – the outstanding place is the old-timers’ LENOX LOUNGE  at 288 Lenox Ave. that was renamed Malcolm X Bulevard – between 124 and 125th streets. They had Danny Coakley & Friends playing in the fabulous Zebra Room where every Jazz Great has performed.   The September program is great and for the September 15th they have booked comedian Paul Mooney.

The place was full – this was our third stop and we arrived about 6:45 pm. The food looked very good – classic American South and the drinks were named after star  musicians.  www.LenoxLounge.com

From there we drove short distance to SHOWMAN’S at 375 West 125th Street Between St. Nicholas Avenue & Morningside Avenue. This is another place with great history but it is smaller and did not hold up as well. They had Jery Weldon but the program said Henry Warner and The New Perspective. Only a few people sat at the long bar.   www.myspace.com

Next let me note the DWYER CULTURAL CENTER where lots of activities go on that galvanize the Harlem communities – that includes backing up all forms of art including the theater. www.dwyercc.org

Going to the new developments in Harlem, let us start with the newest that was actually the starting point of the tour and is heavily backed by the Harlem Chamber of Commerce. This location has actually two separate French West African (Senegalese) enterprises of the same owners: Our point of attention THE SHRINE BAR RESTAURANT and its neighbor THE YATENGA FRENCH BISTRO & BAR. As we got there at 5:30 pm both places were nearly empty and the music at The Shrine started only 5:45 in our honor. I saw the featured singer, Lady Cantrese, but never heard her. At The Shrine the food is mainly toasts and among the drinks they call Shalom an intriguing mixture of scotch and amaretto. The Bistro has quite an interesting menu. W assume the ida might be to go to the bistro for the food and then to the nicely African decor of the Shrine to listen to the music. The place has potential.

The location is 2269-2271 Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Blvd or what is actually 7th Avenue, between 133-134 Streets.
 www.yatengabistro.com

For food lower it seems that The Debrouillard Restaurant Group has planted several sites in Harlem. I understood that two Latin American brothers are behind these enterprises located in Spanish Harlem – none of them is called Ricardo – but the RICARDO’S STEAK HOUSE is an outstanding steak house we visited, and it does not shy away from empanadas either. Further, they honored us with a very good cognac called Conjure. The featured performer was Janice Robinson and, backed up by a L:atin two-men band was very good. The location is 2145 Second Avenue between 110-111 Streets. www.RicardoSteakHouse.com

As said, they own also CEVICHE BAR & TAPAS at 2312 Second Avenue, and astonishingly, POETS DEN GALLERY & THEATER also nearby at 309 East 108 Street. They seemingly have planted here strongly a Latin American (Colombian) corner.

Not to be left behind, the Italians have also come back to Harlem, albeit not to the extreme East side but on Fifth Avenue.
That was actually the last stop at GRAN PIATTO also noted as CUCINA CON AMORE at 1429 Fifth Avenue.
 wwwthelauraman.com and the menu has something for everyone from the health conscious to the American Southern. www.Londell Restaurant.com 2620 Frederick Douglas Blvd. that is 7th Avenue.

The biggest place, and to me a disappointment, was UPTOWN GRAND at 2110 A.C. Powell Jr. Blvd. (btwn.125 & 126 Str. that did not offer anything as was advertised. Instead of a restaurant we saw a big hall with young people milling around with a rather good Latin band being totally neglected. We did not see the featured Performer Pucho, but when we came in we saw leaving Lady Cantrese whom we saw at the beginning of the evening but did not get to listen to here there either. I assume there was some misconnect regarding this place. Wednesdays must be their night for the young folks.www.UptownGrandHarlem.com

That leaves us with another place to which I cannot do justice. That is TERRACE IN THE SKY in the backyard of Columbia University on the roof of Butler Hall, at 400 West 119 Street – between Morningside Drive & Amsterdam Avenue. This is an elegant glass enclosed and roof outdoor as well, French-Mediterranean restaurant with breathtaking views, in all directions, of the Manhattan skylines. www.terraceinthesky.com That was our fourth stop – right after Showman’s, so we got there before 8 pm, but there were no guests left and the musicians was packing their instruments. In short – nothing except we got good Hennessy cognac which I insisted to drink straight. On the other hand, having arrived when darkness was starting to set in – just the right time to see the beauty of the place. This is a weekend dating place for Columbia University and I wonder what is the true reason for not

The Environment at The Metropolitan Museum of Art and THE BIG BAMBU on the roof.

THE BIG BAMBU opened on April 27, 2010 and the second stage (Stage ii) on Friday August 13th -  There will be yet a third stage!

This is a growing Environmental Sculpture if you wish, or a Roof Garden Installation if you prefer, or Elevated Pathways if you are functional.

You can climb it under the supervision of a guide – mine was Naomi Takafuchi who took me to up to 40 feet above the roof-top (which is 110 feet above Central Park ground) and made it possible for us to see the wide horizons of the New York Central Park, and the closing in by tall buildings.

The Monumental Sculpture was conceived and executed by the identical twin brothers – Doug and Mike Starn – born 1961.

They called the work BIG BAMBU: You Can’t, You Don’t, and You Won’t Stop. We found that the explanation is in the numbers – 100 feet long, by 50 feet wide, by 50 feet high and filling as much space of the Iris and Gerald Cantor Roof Garden, as available. Visitors can view the construction in progress that will go on through fall 2010. What then? Who cares? It might take off and travel somewhere else. The real joy is in building it – and for us – to walk through it. Up and down and then, vegetation on the roof has joined in by creeping along. It starts reminding me of the canopy walks of the Amazon I reached years ago via Iquitos, Peru. Only the monkeys outside, looking at us, are missing. However – clearly fun. A major financial contributor to this structure was Mayor Bloomberg, other contributors were from the Polsky  and Caroll family funds.

Oh well, there will be 5,000 interlocking 30 and 40 foot long bamboo poles held together by ropes provided by the Mammut Sports Group, Inc. Yes, there will be 50 miles of nylon ropes in use.  Don’t smoke there, but I got no clear answer if a beer cooler would be OK? I saw one ideal location up there, a bench and some bamboo ends that looked like being there exactly for the use as beer-can holders.

The installation is featured on www.metmuseum.org

For those not in the know – The Museum is at 1,000 Fifth Avenue, and you go in through the 81st Street entrance.

————-

Further, so we do not talk only art – I used the occasion to ask the museum’s information folks – what about Green activities at the Metropolitan? They rolled out before me the existance of a Museum’s Green committee chaired by Whitney Donhauser of the Museum President’s Office. They meet every three months to view how departments use energy, become more efficient energy users in order to turn the buildings “green.” One of the outcomes was the replacement of over 70,000 square feet of flat roofs across the museum, almost two acres, with reflective insulative material. My question, why not some photovoltaics got no answer.

 http://www.opendemocracy.net/openeconomy…

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

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.

———————————————————–

from David Hodas <drhodas@gmail.com> date Mon, Aug 23, 2010 subject International Law and Sustainable Energy

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

The UN as a charade of what it was meant to be – the reporting is by ICP from sources inside the UN – please see the links:

–

Updated August 23, 2010 5:29 p.m.  Some recent articles

At UN, As Sudan Admits Expulsions Are For Rape Detection, Offers Jebel Marra Access.

In Congo, 154 Rapes 30 KM from UN Peacekeepers Leaves UN Silent, P-5 In Disarray.

–

Updated August 24, 2010 4:13 p.m.  Some recent articles

As UN’s Inaction on Congo Rapes Triggers Belated Trips, Why No Flares or Sat Phones?

UN and Council Silent on Congo Rapes of which MONUSCU Had Foreknowledge.

The last item of the August 24, 2010 UN DAILY NEWS:

UN EXPERT URGES RUSSIA TO PICK UP PACE OF PROTECTING RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE – this requires further investigation that can be performed only via direct access to the UN which is being denied. The real issue is now not only the human rights of those peoples under Russian rule, but also if the UN Secretary-General will act on this if in his judgment talking to the Russians on this may harm his chances for re-election.

Although the Russian Government has made “important steps” to protect the rights of its indigenous people, a United Nations independent human rights expert today urged the country to accelerate progress.

James Anaya, the Special Rapporteur on the situation on the freedom of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, called for “continuous and focused attention” in areas such as economic development, health, education and language.

Many indigenous people in Russia continuing to face “multiple impediments” to fully enjoying their human rights, he said, with human development indicators showing that they are “still often faring less well than other sectors of society.”

The expert praised Russia for showing its commitment to improving the living conditions of indigenous people, advancing their cultures and participation in decision-making, as well as developing a comprehensive policy for them.

However, he found that implementing existing laws guaranteeing their rights – at both national and regional levels – “remains a challenge that needs to be resolved.”

Mr. Anaya, who reports in an independent and unpaid capacity to the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council, launched a new report today based on his visit to Russia last October.

One of the areas of focus on his missions was to examine the situation of groups recognized by the Government as “small-numbered indigenous people,” number fewer than 50,000 people.

“Following the fall of communism, and transition to a market economy, indigenous peoples were in a particularly vulnerable position… unable to shape or define their new role in a drastically shifting political and economic atmosphere,” he writes in the publication.

“Many indigenous communities,” the Rapporteur continues, “suffered extreme hardship with some reaching the brink of extinction during this time, while unemployment, poverty and alcoholism soared.”

He calls on the Government to fully support the provisions of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The landmark document, adopted by the General Assembly in 2007, outlines the rights of the world’s estimated 370 million indigenous people and outlaws discrimination against them.

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

Fareed Zakaria discusses CC with Jeff Sachs (Columbia), Pat Michaels (Cato, ex-UVA) & NASA’s Gavin Schmidt.
http://bit.ly/cCQO4Y

Pat Michaels says he is 40% funded by Petroleum Industry. There is no need to fight global warming.

Gavin Schmidt says he thinks we’re too sane not to do something about global warming.

Jeffrey Sachs says – if we do not act we will end up with a catastrophic planet.

Is it clear?

===============

Fareed Zakaria talks to Hirsi Ali who rejected Islam and Irshad Manji who wants to reform Islam.

Hirsi Ali, African Black, born in Mogadisho, Somalia and immigrated to Holland where she went to university and after 9/11 left Islam to become an atheist that says if you need a God take Christ. Her family says she risks hell for leaving Islam.

She says don’t lock 1.57 billion Muslims in a book written in the 7th century. She wrote “Nomad” about her leaving Islam.

She worked with Teo Van Gogh on a movie “Submission” about women in Islam, when he was killed. She was a member of the Netherlands Parliament, and now lives with security in the US and is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

She says that most Americans are unaware of Saudi Funded proselytizing in America.

Irshad Manji , with Pakistani African complexion, born in Uganda, with her family escaped to safety the US in Idi Amin’s days. She heads project Ifthihad at the Moral Courage Institute at NYU. She wants to reform Islam. Good popular cause backed by a good university, but who listens? She tells about a group of young boys in Detroit listening to her mother.

Noting that Brazil’s Amazon forest is well known, but not its drylands,  a Brazilian delegation to the Bonn headquarters of the UNCCD convention Just as prior to Rio Summit of 1992 stressed the need to draw attention to the importance of the well being of the drylands people in Brazil and elsewhere, and to advocate an agenda for policy development. The delegation comprised of Francisco José Pinheiro, Vice Governor of the State of Ceará, the region threatened by desertification and the State hosting the Conference, Professor Antonio Rocha Magalhães, Director of the ICID 2010 Conference, and José Roberto de Lima, Brazil’s designated Technical Focal Point for the Convention in the Ministry of Environment.

UNCCD Executive Secretary Luc Gnacadja welcomes the delegation from Brazil to Bonn: (l to r) Jacob Acevedo (UNCCD), José Roberto de Lima (Brazil), Francisco José Pinheiro (Brazil), Luc Gnacadja (UNCCD), Prof. Antonio Rocha Magalhães(Brazil) and Heitor Matallo (UNCCD)

IISD – EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN – LINKAGES – Volume 177 Number 5 – Monday, 23 August 2010
 https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inb…

and  http://www.viafanzine.jor.br/site_vf/pag…

The Fortaleza Declaration: On the challenges and opportunities of sustainable development and climate change, the Declaration calls for:

• better governance of the drylands, representation of their populations and enhanced livelihoods;

• the enhancement of climate-sensitive sustainable development interventions in drylands;

• recognition of potential synergies to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience for the poor;

• the creation of favorable conditions for sustainable development in drylands through integrated actions to fight land degradation, mitigate drought effects, conserve biodiversity and adapt to climate change; and

• investment opportunities to exploit the comparative advantage of drylands in renewable energy production.

On political representation on multiple scales, the Declaration urges:

• enhanced representation of dryland populations in local, national and international policymaking and in the implementation of development activities;

• strengthening the capacity of dryland nations to influence the global environment and development agenda;

• the UN to consider the plight of dryland nations;

• preparatory meetings of Rio+20 be organized on a global ecosystem basis, to highlight issues pertaining to communities living in, inter alia, the drylands and tropical forests; and

• development and implementation of community-level information strategies to educate people on the implications of climate change.

On synergies among global environmental and development initiatives, the Declaration emphasizes:

• prioritizing sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity; and

• creation of synergies between local, national and global interventions to mitigate and adapt to climate change, conserve biodiversity and curb desertification.

On financing climate-sensitive sustainable development, it calls for:

• absorption of costs related to sustainable development by national economies;

• honoring previous financial obligations to support sustainable development by industrialized countries, the expansion of existing financial instruments, and acceleration of the disbursement of the Climate Investment and Adaptation Funds to local and national capacities; and

• including dryland regions in financial innovations to advance sustainable development under climate change conditions.

On education for sustainable development, the Declaration calls for the prioritization of education for communities in dryland areas.

On knowledge and information exchange, it recommends:

• the design and implementation of an integrated climate research, observation, modeling and applications programme to inform the policy process;

• greater inputs from the social sciences on the causes and effects of climate change and variability;

• bridging the gap between scientific information and political action; and

• expansion and strengthening of knowledge networks.

On integrated planning and implementation of development strategies and programmes, the Declaration calls for increased convergence in development strategies and programmes, especially relating to land and water resource management, forestry and the fight against desertification.

Finally, on responding to urgency, the Declaration calls for decisive action from the international community on climate, development and sustainability challenges.

———————————————————————-

further: A Decade for Deserts and the Fight against Desertification was declared at the meeting by the UN, with the blessing of UNSG Ban Ki-moon.
The United Nations Decade for Deserts and Desertification was launched in Fortaleza, Brazil, yesterday, during the Second International Conference: Climate, Variability, Sustainability and Development, ICID 2010, and at the United Nations Environment Programme in Nairobi, Kenya.

——————————–

CONFERENCE KEYNOTE SPEECH

On Wednesday, Jeffrey Sachs, Director, Earth Institute, Columbia University, US, gave a keynote speech in which he warned that “we may be losing the battle” on anthropogenic climate change, underscoring the many climate-linked disasters in the past year, accompanied by “miserable outcomes” on the political front.

He recommended the ICID 2010 final declaration: declare the climate crisis in semi-arid lands a growing global security threat and a direct threat to the fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs); call for a UN Security Council special session on violence, security and semi-arid lands; and advocate the formation of a new political Alliance of Semi-Arid Countries (ASAC) to speak in a unified voice at the sixteenth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP 16) to be held in Cancún, Mexico, in December 2010. He suggested that the ASAC call for: timely disbursement of adaptation funding, with the priority being hard-hit ASAC countries; the implementation of a global carbon tax to finance adaptation and mitigation efforts; large-scale solar power programmes in ASAC countries where appropriate, focusing on regions trapped in energy poverty.

SYNERGIES AMONG THE UN CONVENTIONS: On Tuesday morning, a plenary session convened, chaired by Luis Alberto Figueiredo Machado, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Brazil.

Via video message, Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC Executive Secretary, suggested better water management practices at the local level to bring the relevant UN Conventions closer together. Director Magalhães called for including indigenous peoples and local communities in the talks on creating synergies. Sergio Zelaya, UNCCD, on behalf of Jaime Webbe, CBD, described future initiatives including a proposed joint liaison group, joint expert group and scientific body, as well as a joint extraordinary session of the Rio Convention COPs at the upcoming Rio+20 Earth Summit. Margarita Astrálaga, UN Environment Programme (UNEP), highlighted that the Rio Conventions can draw from other processes where the synergistic approach is already being implemented.

Nora Berrahmouni, UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), called for integrated action plans to secure resource bases, conserve and preserve livelihoods, and to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Walter Vergara, World Bank, emphasized the importance of understanding the costs and benefits of various adaptation approaches.

Luc Gnacadja, UNCCD Executive Secretary, called for greater investment in sustainable land and water management to ensure food security, decrease the rate of climate change, alleviate drought and avert further biodiversity loss.

In the ensuing discussion, participants discussed, inter alia: increased civil society involvement; greater information sharing on the Rio Conventions; and the inclusion of human rights in the synergies discussion.

THEMATIC PROCESS

From Monday to Thursday, over 70 thematic panel sessions and roundtables convened to address issues related to climate change adaptation, vulnerability and sustainable development. Panels were organized around the four sub-themes of the conference: climate information; climate and sustainable development; climate governance, representation, rights, equity and justice; and climate policy processes. A selection of panel sessions is presented below.

Global Network of Dryland Research Institutes (GNDRI): In this session on Wednesday, participants were briefed about the GNDRI. National institutes from Argentina, Brazil, India, Israel, Syria and the US discussed their institutions’ work and research priorities, including sustainable use of cultural resources, food security, water management, alternative agricultural systems, biodiversity and the creation of “climate ready” crops.

Lessons learned about lessons learned: In this session on Thursday, participants examined how lessons and recommendations developed from past crisis assessments and negotiating processes have not been heeded or implemented, including post-event assessments of natural disasters, problems faced in getting responses from hazard early warning systems, the lessons from the process leading to the Montreal Protocol, and lessons from the disappearance of the Aral Sea.

It was generally agreed that policy recommendations in “lessons learned” reports should always discuss increased risks from not heeding lessons.

Early warning systems for droughts: During this session on Thursday, participants heard presentations on essential components of early warning systems, the South American drought monitoring systems, indices and indicators for monitoring and assessing drought conditions worldwide, and the development of an international drought clearinghouse.

Among the recommendations discussed were the need for fuller understanding of drought impacts; use of a standardized precipitation index in addition to current tools; the development of a user manual on indicators and indices; and the implementation of indices and early warning systems with the end user in mind.

THEME 2: CLIMATE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Participants attended sessions relating to this theme from Monday to Thursday. The theme broadly dealt with climate and sustainable development, with a specific focus on arid and semi-arid lands.

Desertification – the challenge of desertification and sustainable development in semi-arid regions: Participants attended this session on Monday and heard presentations on, inter alia, land degradation and desertification in the Arab region, and the management of scarce water resources in the drylands of Pakistan. They also discussed a case study on the development of a hydro-environmental project in Canindé municipality, Ceará, Brazil, and noted ongoing adaptation work, including planting drought-resistant crop varieties.

———————————

As announced by Xinhua:

International conference on semi-arid regions begins in Brazil.

August 17, 2010

Op-Ed Columnist at The New York Times says – Islam needs a Mandela and means three of them.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise.

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: August 21, 2010

I love that line: “We have to surprise them.” I was watching the movie on an airplane and scribbled that line down on my napkin because it summarizes what is missing today in so many places: leaders who surprise us by rising above their histories, their constituencies, their pollsters, their circumstances — and just do the right things for their countries.

I tried to recall the last time a leader of importance surprised me on the upside by doing something positive, courageous and against the popular will of his country or party. I can think of a few: Yitzhak Rabin in signing onto the Oslo peace process. Anwar Sadat in going to Jerusalem. And, of course, Mandela in the way he led South Africa.

But these are such exceptions. Look at Iraq today. Five months after its first truly open, broad-based election, in which all the major communities voted, the political elite there cannot rise above Shiite or Sunni identities and reach out to the other side so as to produce a national unity government that could carry Iraq into the future. True, democracy takes a long time to grow, especially in a soil bloodied by a murderous dictator for 30 years. Nevertheless, up to now, Iraq’s new leaders have surprised us only on the downside.

Will they ever surprise us the other way? Should we care now that we’re leaving? Yes, because the roots of 9/11 are an intra-Muslim fight, which America, as an ally of one faction, got pulled into. There are at least three different intra-Muslim wars raging today. One is between the Sunni far right and the Sunni far-far right in Saudi Arabia. This was the war between Osama bin Laden (the far-far right) and the Saudi ruling family (the far right). It is a war between those who think women shouldn’t drive and those who think they shouldn’t even leave the house. Bin Laden attacked us because we prop up his Saudi rivals — which we do to get their oil.

In Iraq, you have the pure Sunni- versus-Shiite struggle. And in Pakistan, you have the fundamentalist Sunnis versus everyone else: Shiites, Ahmadis and Sufis. You will notice that in each of these civil wars, barely a week goes by without one Muslim faction blowing up another faction’s mosque or gathering of innocents — like Tuesday’s bombing in Baghdad, at the opening of Ramadan, which killed 61 people.

In short: the key struggle with Islam is not inter-communal, and certainly not between Americans and Muslims. It is intra-communal and going on across the Muslim world. The reason the Iraq war was, is and will remain important is that it created the first chance for Arab Sunnis and Shiites to do something they have never done in modern history: surprise us and freely write their own social contract for how to live together and share power and resources. If they could do that, in the heart of the Arab world, and actually begin to ease the intra-communal struggle within Islam, it would be a huge example for others. It would mean that any Arab country could be a democracy and not have to be held together by an iron fist from above.

But it will be impossible without Iraqi Shiite and Sunni Mandelas ready to let the future bury the past. As one of Mandela’s guards, watching the new president engage with South African whites, asks in the movie, “How do you spend 30 years in a tiny cell and come out ready to forgive the people who put you there?” It takes a very special leader.

This is also why the issue of the mosque and community center near the site of 9/11 is a sideshow. The truly important question “is not can the different Muslim sects live with Americans in harmony, but can they live with each other in harmony,” said Stephen P. Cohen, an expert on interfaith relations and author of “Beyond America’s Grasp: a Century of Failed Diplomacy in the Middle East.”

Indeed, the big problem is not those Muslims building mosques in America, it is those Muslims blowing up mosques in the Middle East. And the answer to them is not an interfaith dialogue in America. It is an intrafaith dialogue — so sorely missing — in the Muslim world. Our surge in Iraq will never bear fruit without a political surge by Arabs and Muslims to heal intracommunal divides. It would be great if President Obama surprised everyone and gave another speech in Cairo — or Baghdad — saying that.