You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
International-UN-NGOs
UN unveils sweeping blueprint for reform
2004-12-01
Uh-huh. Sure.
The United Nations unveiled a timid sweeping proposal to maintain the status quo overhaul the organisation, including the Security Council, in what would be the biggest UN reform since its founding in 1945. After bitter divisions over the war in Iraq, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan ordered a high-level panel last year to come up with the blueprint and help the United Nations adapt to the 21st century. The panel's report released Tuesday proposed more than 100 recommendations, including some -- an expansion of the Security Council and a definition of terrorism -- that have eluded UN diplomats for years. "What is needed is a comprehensive system of collective security, one that tackles both old and new threats, and addresses the security concerns of all states -- rich and poor, weak and strong," Annan said in an introduction to the report.
"And we're going to do all that with this here little document," he added.
He said the proposals, which must be approved by member nations, set out "a broad framework for collective security and indeed gives a broader meaning to that concept appropriate for the new millennium." In setting out a blueprint for collective security decisions, the report also takes implicit aim at the United States over the Iraqi war, which was strongly opposed by Annan and many Security Council member states. "There is little evident international acceptance of the idea of security being best preserved by a balance of power or by any single -- even benignly motivated -- superpower," the panel said.
For darned sure, security isn't going to be preserved by the UN, reformed or not.
"The yearning for an international system governed by the rule of law has grown," it said. "No state, no matter how powerful, can by its own efforts alone make itself invulnerable to today's threats." Annan has repeatedly maintained that many people around the globe are concerned about disease and poverty rather than terrorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and much of the report underlines his core argument.
In that case I guess there's no danger from terrorism.
The report identifies a wide variety of threats to international security today, citing organised crime, poverty and failed states along with war, terrorism and WMD. It outlines three principles for collective security -- that current threats go beyond national boundaries, that no nation is strong enough to defend itself alone, and that not every nation will be willing or able to protect its own people or refrain from harming its neighbours.
Funny, not a word about thugs, dictators and kleptocrats.
Annan, whose term ends in 2006, has indicated that he will devote much of his remaining time in office to pushing for the reforms, which would have to be approved by member states.
As long as it keeps him off the streets at night, but then again, a good dinner would do that and would be somewhat cheaper.
Revamping the Security Council, the top UN decision-making body, is likely to be the most contentious issue, and the panel itself came up with two competing proposals for expanding the council's membership to 24 seats. One method would add six new permanent members to the council, which has had the same five permanent states -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- since the United Nations was founded in the wake of World War II. That proposal would also add three new non-permanent members to the 10 current non-permanent members, who hold rotating two-year seats. The six new permanent seats, without the veto power that the current five have, would be allotted to two nations from Asia, two from Africa, one from Europe and one from the Americas. The other proposal would create a third tier of council member nations, which would be given four-year, non-permanent seats, which could be renewed. Two-thirds of the 191 UN member nations would have to approve any change to the council membership, which would then take effect if none of the permanent members uses its veto power to block the move. The UN reform panel was headed by former Thai prime minister Anand Panyarachun. Among the other members are Brent Scowcroft, a shill for old-guard interests former US national security advisor, and former Chinese foreign minister Qian Qichen.
Posted by:Steve White

#22  These reforms are the equivalent of drawing spots on a pig with a magic marker and calling it a cheetah.
Posted by: RWV   2004-12-01 9:19:03 PM  

#21  I saw the headline, clicked and expected to see it be a link from Scrappleface. Go figure...
Posted by: eLarson   2004-12-01 4:16:34 PM  

#20  I doubt any UN reform will be of more than marginal significance (not that marginal improvements might not be helpful). Doesnt mean the UN will die (sorry folks) but it wont grow in importance either. UNGA will remain a debating society and diplo gathering place, UNSC will remain useful in coordinating efforts in SOME instances where ALL great powers are on the same side, and the technical agencies will (with some exceptions) do good work. Nothing more.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-12-01 10:46:23 AM  

#19  It's bad enough when the Neighborhood Beautification Committee is constantly accusing you of needing to change the color of your house, or re-plant the flower beds with something different...etc. It's intolerable when they are holding their meetings in your FAMILY ROOM!!

The u.n. will ALWAYS find fault first, last and always with the U.S. I prefer they do it SOMEWHERE ELSE!
Posted by: justrand   2004-12-01 10:40:14 AM  

#18  that current threats go beyond national boundaries, that no nation is strong enough to defend itself alone, and that not every nation will be willing or able to protect its own people or refrain from harming its neighbours.

You mean these blindingly obvious facts were not central to the original UN Charter in 1945?

The fatal flaw in the UN structure is its fetish of national sovereignty that's implied by the asinine mantra of "the world community." There is no such community. The harsh fact is that the greatest cause of third world misery is the governments of third world nations, at least 80% of which are brutal, incompetent kleptocracies. And many are nightmare regimes. Asking the permission or approval of these thugs for collective action is like asking a wife-beater to judge divorce cases.
Posted by: lex   2004-12-01 10:38:58 AM  

#17  Bwahahahahah.

That's why Norm Coleman writes an article in the WSJ calling for KA to go.

He won't. Throws up this smoke scren instead as part of the Lilliputian tie down Gulliver strategy.

Gulliver lies down? I don't think so.

Coleman calls for the truth from Kofi and Volcker.

Gets nothing.

Coleman calls for cut off of US funding for UN until Kofi comes clean.

Nothing.

UN withers and becomes toothless debating society as US directly funds international agencies whose work it supports.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2004-12-01 10:30:37 AM  

#16  and I want a pony for Xmas. Acceptable UN reform will be forced down their kicking and screaming throats. Too many otehr interests want to use the institution to tie down American power used in furthering American interests (like self defense). They will not accept reforms we want, ergo your beloved UN will die, Mike. Sorry for you, Sorry -not- for the UN....a corrupt kleptocracy of unelected bureaucrats from failed countries. Buh-bye, Kofi!
Posted by: Frank G   2004-12-01 10:28:05 AM  

#15   I think there has long been a consensus that the UN's structure (especially the Security Council) is obsolete.

Cleaned it up for ya, Mikey.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2004-12-01 10:26:00 AM  

#14  
I expect also that the eventual support for the UN's reform will be very bi-partisan.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester   2004-12-01 10:22:52 AM  

#13  
I expect that the US government eventually will approve of a major reform along these lines. The public and Congress will have a big debate about the details, but I think there has long been a consensus that the UN's structure (especially the Security Council) is obsolete.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester   2004-12-01 10:09:09 AM  

#12  You know if this weren't so sad it would be funny.

Kofi the most corrupt politician ever known - responsible for the largest fraud the world has ever known, is trying to divert attention from the food-for-palaces/food/bombs program to this 'sweeping reform' of his criminal organization.

Here is some reform for you: Stop all funding of the UN from the US and form a new organization. Doesn't Japan also pay a huge amount to the UN as well? I bet we can get them to join us. On and kick the UN out of the US.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2004-12-01 9:40:36 AM  

#11  Classic example of avoidance. Kof-ster: the first step is to admit the problem - your whole organization is corrupt, ineffective, and a waste of oxygen. Go away and bother us no more!
Posted by: Spot   2004-12-01 9:01:08 AM  

#10  Too bad that part of the 'reform' plan doesn't include leaving the U.S. Heck I would even help them pack.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2004-12-01 8:26:32 AM  

#9  "The yearning for an international system governed by the rule of law has grown"
hahahahaha...Oh please someone make him shutup, he's killing me!
Hey retard, care to guess why? C'mon take a shot -it because you idiots have proven to be the most corrupt, feckless, criminally abusive, self serving whores ever to disgrace the international stage. Ignoring legitimate problems, blowing murderous dictators and funneling illegal payments to family members isn't what the world wants? Who da thunk it?
Its gratifying to see that my distain for all things UN is well founded.
Posted by: JerseyMike   2004-12-01 8:01:44 AM  

#8  Comissioning a high level panel to make "sweeping recommendations" : $1 Million

Pronouncing the recommendations "meaningful" and promising significant overhaul for the "new millenium" : a couple-of-bucks

Ultimately not having to make any real changes, maintaining our corrupt anti-US-petrowhoring do-nothing-real place in the world while being able to take a swipe at the US in the process : pricele$$
Posted by: PlanetDan   2004-12-01 6:19:46 AM  

#7  I like the idea of putting more dictatorships in the Security Council in order to balance out the hyperpower US from running amok, picking on poor third world nations and stealing their wealth Yep. That'll fix her.

Remember, capitalisim and democracy doesn't work. The reason we are successful is because we steal the resources of poor third world nations. The the UN and thus the World needs more involvment from Dinky Dictatorships in order to become a better place. I love this idea. Let this and graft be Kofi's legacy.
Posted by: Ol_Dirty_American   2004-12-01 3:06:31 AM  

#6  Uh huh.... Get caught smack dab in the middle of the biggest theft in the history of theft and then call for "reforms". Well, the only acceptable reform is to GET THE u.n. THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY!!!!!

Withdraw all U.S. tax dollars from the u.n. PERIOD!! Without U.S. tax dollars the worthless u.n. will cease to exist. The u.n. is nothing without U.S. participation.
Posted by: Floting Granter5198   2004-12-01 2:28:53 AM  

#5  More deckchairs! Yep, that will stop it sinking for sure.
Posted by: phil_b   2004-12-01 1:47:32 AM  

#4  Opaque-nost is the UN's motto. Slap a study on it and the world will leave them alone to rape and pillage so the UN can reform.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2004-12-01 1:44:44 AM  

#3  We're not trying to be invulnerable, Kofi. Just pointing out the fact that we don't need your permission to defend ourselves. Or to join with like-minded states to whack out obnoxious thugs.
Posted by: mojo   2004-12-01 1:32:03 AM  

#2  Mostly it's about getting back at the US for going with a colition of the willing without Kofi's blessing. I don't think Kofi is going to last much longer. SOS different day.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2004-12-01 1:09:53 AM  

#1  sound like a bit of gorbachovian perestroika to me--and will be just as effective
Posted by: SON OF TOLUI   2004-12-01 12:59:27 AM  

00:00