| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| S Korean chosen as next UN chief |
| 2006-10-09 |
| SOUTH Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon was formally nominated as UN secretary-general today, only hours after North Korea defied the world body by announcing a nuclear test. The UN Security Council voted by acclamation behind closed doors, effectively selecting Ban as successor to Secretary-General Kofi Annan, whose 10 years in office expire on December 31. Mr Ban's six rivals had withdrawn from the race earlier. The 192-member UN General Assembly must give final approval to Mr Ban's nomination, which usually follows within a week or two. That vote is expected to be positive. Mr Ban, speaking to reporters in Seoul after the Security Council vote, said North Korea's test was "a grave and direct threat to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia". "This should be a moment of joy but instead I stand here with a very heavy heart," he said. Shortly after nominating Mr Ban, the 15 Security Council ambassadors went into closed consultations on North Korea to see what action could be taken after Pyongyang announcement of a successful nuclear weapon test. The council on Saturday had urged North Korea not to carry out a test, warning of unspecified consequences if it did. "I think the fact the candidate is current foreign minister of the Republic of Korea is an asset in dealing with the situation in the Korean peninsula that we are now facing," Japan's UN Ambassador Kenzo Oshima told reporters. Some diplomats, including Mr Oshima, have speculated that North Korea's October 3 announcement of plans to carry out the underground nuclear test was timed, in part, to coincide with Mr Ban's candidacy in an effort to get world attention. Mr Ban, 62, would be the eighth secretary-general in the world body's 60-year history. He will inherit a bureaucracy of 9000 staff, a $US5 billion ($6.74 billion) budget and more than 90,000 peacekeepers in 18 operations around the globe that cost another $US5 billion. US Ambassador John Bolton immediately emphasised the need for UN management reform. "With this vote today, the winds of change at the United Nations have started to rise and we are looking forward to some significant steps in the reform process when he takes office," he said. Mr Annan, in his own statement, welcomed the nomination. He said he had the "highest respect" for Mr Ban and would do "everything possible to ensure a smooth transition," a spokesman said. The low-keyed Mr Ban will be a contrast to Mr Annan, a Ghanaian who in his first five years won a Nobel Peace Prize and was sometimes dubbed a diplomatic rock star, before financial scandals took over headlines in the past few years. Among colleagues in Seoul, everyone seemed to agree that Mr Ban is pleasant and hard-working. Jang Sung-min, a former presidential aide and member of parliament said: "He probably won't do a bad job. It is really hard to think of a problem with Ban. Maybe that's his strong point - that there's nothing peculiar about him." Although Mr Annan was criticised regularly in the US, Europeans viewed him more favourably and many so far have ignored the imminent arrival of Mr Ban. Mr Ban won't be "the sort of activist diplomat, ready to seize the initiative, which we saw in Kofi Annan", said Dick Leurdijk, a UN expert at the Netherlands Clingendael Institute of International Relations. "I think he will be more like his Asian predecessor U Thant, who just took care of the shop," he said, referring to the Burmese diplomat who held the post from 1961-71. |
| Posted by:Oztralian |
| #6 We did? Only if you were anti-Semitic. I light of South Korea's current anti-Americanism, I'm not really thrilled by this development. I suppose that anything is better than Kofi, but time will tell. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-10-09 22:54 |
| #5 Mr Ban won't be "the sort of activist diplomat, ready to seize the initiative, which we saw in Kofi Annan" We did? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-10-09 22:43 |
| #4 #3 .com: "more than 90,000 peacekeepers in 18 operations around the globe that cost another $US5 billion" Wouldn't it be cheaper for us to just arm the side we like? |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-10-09 22:39 |
| #3 This bit jumped out at me: more than 90,000 peacekeepers in 18 operations around the globe that cost another $US5 billion Geez. Negative ROI. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-09 21:55 |
| #2 truw....except the catered French cuisine will be foregone in favor of Kimchi variations....no help for greenhouse gas containment tho' |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-10-09 21:52 |
| #1 Can't say why, exactly, but I don't feel all warm 'n runny 'bout this. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-09 21:48 |