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
Poor nations lose in watered-down UN document
2005-09-14
Diplomats at the United Nations finally reached agreement last night on a watered-down document to reform the organisation and tackle poverty just hours before leaders arrived for the start of a world summit. This final draft, to be presented to the leaders for publication on Friday, fell far short of ambitious proposals for an overhaul of the UN which was set out earlier this year by Kofi Annan, the secretary general.

Development campaigners expressed disappointment at the lack of progress on aid, debt and, particularly, trade. Ambassadors at the UN, who have been engaged in tortuous negotiations for weeks, made one final push yesterday to find consensus but soon abandoned the attempt.

Instead, Jean Ping, Gabon's ambassador to the UN and president of the general assembly, unilaterally removed all the remaining points of contention, leaving in place a bland final draft. It is far removed from the original plan to reform the UN to meet the challenges of the 21st century. The general assembly voted in favour of the final draft, which is unlikely to be changed between now and Friday.

About 149 leaders are scheduled to attend the summit, which would make it the biggest-ever world gathering. The general assembly will be addressed by George Bush this morning, and Tony Blair this evening.

Campaigners and diplomats who favoured a bold approach put much of the blame for the failure on John Bolton, the US ambassador to the UN, who introduced hundreds of late changes to the original document.
Attaboy, John. You got a drink coming at the O-club on me.
Mr Bolton said he was pleased with the final draft: "This is not the alpha and omega and we never thought it would be." The US ambassador, who had argued that UN reform was too important to be done in a rush, said: "It was only ever going to be the first step."

Oxfam described the development section of the final draft as a "recycling of old pledges". Save the Children said the chance of a historic breakthrough on poverty "had all but slipped through the fingers of world leaders".

The final draft document shows progress has been made during negotiations on intervention to prevent genocide, but limited progress on the creation of two UN bodies, a human rights council and a peace-building commission. There is no new money for aid or debt relief, and the language on fair trade has been weakened. Nor has there been movement on climate change, arms proliferation or expansion of the security council.

The negotiations have been caught in a squeeze between Mr Bolton, and a group of countries that one diplomat referred to as "the awkward squad of evil", which includes Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela.

Mr Blair, who will meet Mr Bush this morning, is worried that progress made at the G8 meeting at Gleneagles in July on aid and debt may end up being reversed. The prime minister believes elections in Germany and Japan, together with the impact of Hurricane Katrina in the US, may make it more difficult to persuade G8 members to make good on their promises and to widen the Gleneagles agreement to other rich countries.
Rather hard for the Germans to pledge what they don't have.
Although some development campaigners have criticised the government for exaggerating the success of the Gleneagles deal, Mr Blair believes he pushed the G8 as far as possible. A Downing Street source said: "We always said Gleneagles was just a beginning and it is going to take quite a fight to build on it. There is the risk of a backlash."
Posted by:Steve White

#11  "recycling of old pledges"

Oh well, how about honoring those first?
They just wanted some shiny new pledges that they of course weren't to honor anyway, just like the old ones.
Posted by: True German Ally   2005-09-14 16:59  

#10  mite as well brake it eezy to em
Posted by: muck4doo   2005-09-14 14:13  

#9  Oxfam described the development section of the final draft as a "recycling of old pledges". Save the Children said the chance of a historic breakthrough on poverty "had all but slipped through the fingers of world leaders".

My wallet thanks you, John Bolton...
Posted by: tu3031   2005-09-14 12:06  

#8  Boo-fucken'-hoo.
Posted by: mmurray821   2005-09-14 12:00  

#7  Everyone raise their hand who thinks the founders of the United Nations really intended for the UN bureaucrats to have their hands on our wallets?
Posted by: Darrell   2005-09-14 11:57  

#6  Everyone raise their hand who thinks the founders of the United Nations really intended "tackling poverty" as a primary mandate of the UN?
Posted by: DO   2005-09-14 11:32  

#5  A perfect example of why the GA is a ball-less gas factory, by design.
Posted by: mojo   2005-09-14 10:25  

#4  Too baaaaad.
Posted by: gromgoru   2005-09-14 06:26  

#3  Typical Guardian spin. Bolton wanted a bunch of stuff taken out. A bunch of stuff was taken out. Look to me like he won.
Posted by: phil_b   2005-09-14 02:11  

#2  "Poor nations lose in watered-down UN document" What did they lose? Jaques and Kofi's attempt to put the UN;s hand in my wallet? Oxfam? Save the Children? Are they here in my town saving children? Those recycling old pledges would be the EU of course.

Stick a fork in this waste of space and time called the UN, it's done.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom   2005-09-14 01:05  

#1  "Campaigners and diplomats who favoured a bold approach..."

They misspelled "old".

Throwing money, other people's money, is always their "answer". The UN is the most concentrated nest of con artists, kleptocrats, crooks, scammers, and schemers ever assembled.

Thanks, John. You're just what this bunch needs.
Posted by: .com   2005-09-14 00:37  

00:00