| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| Annan deputy defends appraisal of US |
| 2006-06-07 |
| THE deputy to UN chief Kofi Annan today defended his candid critique of American policy towards the United Nations, dismissing suggestions it was anti-US or partisan. UN Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown spoke to reporters a day after calling for more consistent US leadership at the UN in a speech to mostly Democratic foreign policy-makers in New York. He said the speech was not intended to be "partisan or provocative" but was meant to convey the idea that "America needs a global foreign policy and the UN is a critical part of that". The speech slammed the prevailing US "practice of seeking to use the UN almost by stealth as a diplomatic tool while failing to stand up for it against its domestic critics". It also said that while Washington is constructively engaged with the UN on a host of issues such as Iran, Afghanistan, Lebanon or Syria, "much of the public discourse that reaches the US heartland has been largely abandoned to its loudest detractors such as (conservative radio talk show host) Rush Limbaugh and Fox News". "Exacerbating matters is the widely held perception, even among many US allies, that the US tends to hold on to maximalist positions when it could be finding middle ground," Mr Malloch Brown said yesterday. The remarks prompted a furious reaction from the US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, who described them as "a very grave mistake" and urged Mr Annan to repudiate his deputy. Mr Annan refused to do so and said through his spokesman that he "agrees with the thrust" of his deputy's speech. The slanging match coincides with a continuing deadlock between wealthy and developing nations over UN management reforms put forward by Mr Annan in the wake of a series of corruption scandals. The world body faces possible financial gridlock at the end of the month, when a $US950 million ($1.29 billion) spending cap on a two-year $US3.798 billion ($5.14 billion) UN budget agreed last December expires, if wealthy and developing countries fail to reach agreement on the reforms. Washington has threatened to withdraw funding if the reforms are not adopted by then, and EU countries have said they will have to take another look at their contributions. Mr Malloch Brown, a Briton who took over as deputy secretary general in March and will step down when Mr Annan's term ends on December 31, said his remarks were part of a bid to nudge rich and developing countries towards a compromise and avert a financial crisis. He said he had come under fire from the 132-member Group of 77 developing nations in recent months "for telling them that they too need to get their house in order and engage around this reform agenda". Mr Malloch Brown said the impasse was in part due to "a perception among many otherwise quite moderate countries that anything the US supports must have a secret agenda aimed at either subordinating multilateral processes to Washington's ends or weakening the institutions". "This organisation is slipping toward a very serious crisis," he told reporters. "We have to stand up and appeal for engagement, sanity by both sides." "This is the time where it is important that truth be spoken and everybody understand each other. "The worry for me is that the reaction to the speech will polarise things in Washington." Noting he was routinely described as "the most pro-American senior UN official", he said the speech was a "call from a friend to think hard about how the US could handle the UN better". |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #19 I sense a parallel here between the UN funding, about to run out, and Paleo funding. BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Maybe they'll keep this arrogance up long enough for sentiment to peak here in the US for cutting these kleptocrats to the bone. Please, oh please. |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-06-07 23:40 |
| #18 Without US and Japanese money and non cash support there is no UN. Better get a grip on that. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-06-07 23:36 |
| #17 He said he had come under fire from the 132-member Group of 77 developing nations... Well it looks like we can add "math" to the list of things they don't do too well... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-06-07 23:07 |
| #16 And Shawn does have them by the short curlies, thanks to his efforts and those of Claudia Rossett and a few others. I consider his stalking questions to Sevan to be classics. Coulter nails the Jersey Girls for the Cindy Sheehan wannabees they are. I wish she had done this way back when that fraud began to emerge, but still she does us all a great service with her guts to rip away the phoney cloak of impunity these activist "widows" have wrapped around themselves. |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-06-07 23:03 |
| #15 Shawn is upset. FoxNews takes it as an attack on their existance. That's because it is. If the UN's partners in corruption get back in power, we'll see the "fairness doctrine" and all sorts of other crap reinstated to "bring balance to the airwaves". The left hates free discourse, and will stop at nothing to shut down anything that doesn't toe the line. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-06-07 22:51 |
| #14 and Hillary (stupidly) engaged - check out the Drudge Report |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-06-07 22:44 |
| #13 did you watch it tonight. Shawn is upset. FoxNews takes it as an attack on their existance. While at it Ann Coulter declared war on the left... |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-06-07 22:42 |
| #12 good call. Surprised the UN didn't call for him to be silenced... "to avoid harming the UN mission" |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-06-07 22:38 |
| #11 I just had a head-slap moment. You want to know what this is about? It's about Eric Shawn's book "The UN Exposed". He's on Fox, and I'd bet good money he's touted his book on Rush, or Rush has mentioned his book without having Shawn on the show. I think Shawn must have drawn some blood. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-06-07 22:22 |
| #10 from LGF: Kofi defends same - time to cut to the frigging 5% bone and tell em to find a new home. GTFO: “Even though the target of the speech was the United States, the victim, I fear, will be the United Nations,” Bolton told reporters after speaking with Annan. ... Bolton accused Malloch Brown of employing “a condescending, patronizing tone about the American people” and said, “My hope is he looks at the potential adverse effects that these intemperate remarks would have on the organization and repudiate it.” Annan, however, agrees with his deputy’s views, U.N. chief spokesman Stephane Dujarric said. “The secretary-general stands by the statements made by his deputy. So there is no question of any action to be taken against the deputy secretary-general,” he said. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-06-07 22:21 |
| #9 22% of "normal" operations budget. 27% of "peacekeeping" operations budget. |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-06-07 22:17 |
| #8 Bolton has no control over Rush or Fox news. This isn't Burma as much as Kofi and his boys would like it to be. That is if they were in charge. We take a lot of shit at the U.N. for a country that bankrolls them to the extent that we do. Without the U.S. dollars, the whole thing would be for not. Think about that you f*cking skidmarks! |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2006-06-07 22:13 |
| #7 The traditional or official "20%" figure given for US-specific $$$ contributions towards the UNO total budget is gener accepted by most analysts as a "low-end", minima conservative estimate - read, NOT LESS THAN. ON 9-11 AMerica's enemies told America to either accept Socialism-Communism and OWG or Amer will be destroyed, to which Dubya rightly interpreted as synonymous wid saying America either DE FACTO = OVERTLY rules the world, or Amer's enemies will destroy America so DUBYA > AMERICA DECIDES IT AND ITS ALLIES WILL RULE THE WORLD. AMER WILL RULE IN THE AMERICAN WAY, I.E. MOSTLY ECONOMICS/DEMOCAPITALISM-BASED. As after WW2, Radical Islam MUST be made into US-Western economic and democratic modern global allies, AND WHETHER THE RADICS-ANARCHISTS LIKE IT OR NOT. America restrained itself before and after two World Wars and most of the Cold War until REAGAN and BUSH 1 came along - NO MORE!? BILL CLINTON may had tried to use the still-expanding 1990's Reagan-Bush 1-Repub economy to save and justify Failed Leftism-Socialism and the Democrats, BUT DEM POTUS CLINTON'S HANDLING OF THE ECONOMY ALSO INDIR MADE IT [MORE]SEVERELY-CATASTROPHICALLY DIFFICULT FOR AMERICA'S ENEMIES TO EFFECTIVELY COMPETE AGAINST AMERICA, IFF TO COMPETE AT ALL. FOX NEWS was really brutal on the UNO in general this morning, "the evidence is in" describing the UNO's crmininal/malicious, mostly conspiratorial efforts to hamstrung America, from DESERT STORM thru OIL-FOR-FOOD thru IRAQI FREEDOM thru present, etc., in order to control America's $$$. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-06-07 22:11 |
| #6 Here's an idea, jerkface: GET THE HELL OUT OF THE US. And take the U |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-06-07 21:59 |
| #5 ...said his remarks were part of a bid to nudge rich and developing countries towards a compromise and avert a financial crisis. Oh, you mean a shakedown. Well you folks are good at that... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-06-07 20:56 |
| #4 Noting he was routinely described as "the most pro-American senior UN official", he said the speech was a "call from a friend to think hard about how the US could handle the UN better". "By not paying so much attention to our corruption, crimes against humanity, and endless priviledges." |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-06-07 20:48 |
| #3 Move along, these turds get flushed soon. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-06-07 20:34 |
| #2 That would be differ. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2006-06-07 20:32 |
| #1 "America needs a global foreign policy and the UN is a critical part of that". I beg to difer. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2006-06-07 20:31 |