|
|||||
UN Performance Problems UN Management Accountability Struggles Where is the Rule of Law? Inadequate UN Oversight Recent Developments
|
|
The many negative
events of 2004 highlighted UN Secretariat performance issues as never
before. They suggested that
past efforts at overall reform, or new management systems, or more earnest
rhetoric, would not suffice. Instead, the Secretariat requires a
fundamental reform in its overall management culture of impunity and
non-accountability. But can
the UN shake off its entrenched management culture? The tipping point is there, but
will it bring much-needed reforms, or just more of the usual UN "smoke and
mirrors"?
This subsection
examines the possibilities that, this time, UN management culture change
might just be "for real." It
begins with some more overall warnings from outside analysts about the
need for decisive UN management change (IO Watch finds the words
"management reform" so tainted in the UN that it hesitates to use them any
more.) It then briefly
surveys the most troubling and dramatic problem -- the UN oil-for-food
programme in Iraq, followed by the many other problem areas of UN effort
being sharply criticized in 2005. The subsection ends
with an extended analysis of the ways in which the UN Secretariat
responded to these challenges during early 2005. After some hasty reexaminations,
it first offered some reasonable mea culpas and acknowledgement
that major management culture changes are needed. Regrettably, however,
the Secretariat rather quickly settled into its old lines of defense and
gamesmanship. The games
included, in sequence: -- asserting that
"modernists", including Mr. Annan, were now ready to begin taking over;
-- blaming Member
States (as always) for the situation; -- looking resolutely
ahead rather than at the current mess; -- rather aggressively
belaboring major UN member states for their shortcomings;
-- and last, and worst
of all, arguing that a severely mismanaged UN Secretariat should continue
its own self-regulation, and indeed should free its senior managers even
more from accountability processes, to "allow them to
manage." In early 2005,
however, the initial emphasis was on the overall urgent need to rebuild
the UN's credibility and reputation, as damaged by the many operational
problems of 2004, and as reflected in the three following
quotes. "Isolated diplomatically over Iraq, beset with
financial and sexual scandals and manifestly failing to halt genocide in
Sudan, the UN must prove its mettle in dealing with the humanitarian
crisis in South-east Asia or face a threat to its very existence.
Two interrelated crises
have now brought
the UN not only to impotence (a regular occurrence), but to institutional
meltdown under Kofi Annan. The 9/11 attacks
created a new kind of threat
to world order
The UN Security Council is a forum for the big players to
settle their differences, eyeball to eyeball. You can't do that with Osama bin
Laden.
The other new crisis is the descent of the
permanent UN bureaucracy into wholesale corruption. There has always been petty
sleaze, but it was accelerated vastly by the UN's oil-for-food programme
Annan is the first secretary general to be
recruited from the ranks of the UN permanent staff. As such, he
is more prone to
defend his bureaucrats from outside criticism.
The best solution is a new secretary general
perhaps a former prime minister or president -- who carries respect in the
major world capitals."
George Kerevan, "Has impotent UN finally outlived its usefulness?", The Scotsman, 5 January 2005.
"Can Kofi Annan survive? The secretary-general of the
United Nations has just finished what he himself admits was an annus
horribilis for his organization.
Now an American-led campaign to unseat him is probably closer to
its goal than ever.
Although Mr. Annan is unlikely to be directly
implicated in any personal corruption [in the UN's much-criticised
oil-for-food programme in Iraq], some of his staff could well be. As the overall boss, he could be
culpable of negligence at least.
More troubling could be his son's links to
Cotecna, a Swiss-based company that monitored imports of humanitarian aid
into Iraq.
Meanwhile,
there are grumbles from America
about the UN's alleged mishandling of relief for the tsunami
disaster. Wrangles [continue]
about the UN's role in Darfur, [and] charges of rape and sexual abuse of
children by UN peacekeepers in Congo
This week [Mr. Annan] announced that Mark
Malloch Brown, the media-savvy head of the [UNDP]
is to take over as his
chief of staff
But he will
need to draw on all Mr. Malloch Brown's presentational skills if he is to
mount an effective defense to the Volcker report." "Kofi creamed: The secretary-general is under
increasing pressure to quit", The Economist, January 8th,
2005, pp. 44-45. "
[Secretary-General Kofi] Annan is doing the
right thing by planning further management changes
Major shakeups are
needed in critical areas like peacekeeping and refugee assistance.
. Helping the poor and desperate
demands
strengthening the management of peacekeeping operations. Some kind of appalling nadir was
reached last month with reports that members of an international
contingent of UN peacekeepers in Congo had been raping the young girls
they had been sent to protect.
Annan and his staff must spare no effort to see that these crimes
are prosecuted and punished Sweeping changes are also needed at the UN
refugee agency
Not only has the current high commissioner, Ruud Lubbers,
performed uninspiringly, but his relations with his staff have been
embittered by a charge of sexual harassment.
The complainant withdrew
formal charges and Lubbers says he intends to finish his term, which ends
in December. He should be
asked to leave now. Given the unremitting hostility of
the Bush administration, the survival of the United Nations as an
effective organization cannot be taken for granted. Annan will have to challenge the
self-protective bureaucracy more radically than it has ever been
challenged."
"Housecleaning at the UN", International Herald
Tribune, January 12, 2005.
The most powerful
factor in the continuing heavy pressure for UN management change was, and
will probably continue to be, the steadily-emerging findings and scandals
concerning the UN-administered oil-for food programme in Iraq, especially
in two rather negative interim reports by the Volcker inquiry, as
summarized in the following five quotes. "[The Volcker preliminary report]
has sharply
criticized the United Nations for insufficiently auditing operations [of
the oil-for-food program, especially]
at its New York
headquarters. 'There were no examinations of the oil and
humanitarian contracts
during the OFFP.
Oil contracts were not examined
[closely]
despite the fact that UN officials had contract-approval
responsibilities.' It was also 'unclear' why the audits
'focused
on areas and operations peripheral to or
away from, headquarters
operations of the OIP.' Even where audits of the programme were done,
there was often no follow-up.
The UN has explained many of the programme's
problems in terms of political games between powerful countries, but the
audits reveal that the UN secretariat itself failed to exert necessary
oversight. The report said more comprehensive monitoring
could have deterred the surcharge scheme on Iraqi oil contracts,
as well
as undercutting the Iraqi government's kickback scheme for goods
purchases.
[It found]
no examination of the processing
of letters of credit by the
bank that handled the oil-for-food account,
'even though UN officials were overseeing the work of the BNP and had
approval roles in oil sales and payments to
vendors." Mark Turner, "UN criticized by Iraq oil-for-food inquiry", Financial Times (UK), January 11, 2005.
"[The Volcker panel interim report]
investigating the [UN] oil-for-food program in Iraq severely criticizes
its director and depicts the program as 'tainted' for failing to follow
the organization's own procedures. In an essay Thursday in The Wall Street
Journal, Volcker
said the report
. accused Benon Sevan, the Cypriot
who had headed what was once the world body's largest humanitarian effort,
of 'irreconcilable conflict
of interest.'
An official [said that the report]
also
criticized
Joseph Stephanides, a senior official on the Security Council
staff, for failing to ensure that the organization's own rules for buying
oil, selling goods and selecting contractors were followed.
In his essay, Volcker said that
'The findings do not make for pleasant reading'
The interim report concluded that the
auditing system was 'underfunded and undermanned' and hence, 'unable to
meet effectively the challenge posed by a really unique, massive and
complex program of humanitarian assistance.'
. The auditing system
lacked 'clear
reporting lines and the management responsiveness critical to achieving a
fully effective auditing process.' [Further, he wrote,] the commission found what he called 'a clear lapse from disciplined judgement.'" Judith Miller, "Panel calls oil-for-food program 'tainted'", International Herald Tribune, February 4, 2005. "
[Investigator, Mark Pieth
rejected [Kofi]
Annan's declaration that the [Volcker] report
exonerated him on the
matter of Cotecna winning a $10 million a year UN contract, while he was
secretary-general, and while it employed his son, Kojo. 'We did not exonerate Kofi Annan', Pieth said
in an interview. 'We should not brush this off. A certain mea culpa would have been
appropriate.'
Annan, when asked if he planned to step down,
replied 'Hell, no"
'After so many distressing and untrue allegations
made against me, this exoneration
is a great
relief.' But the report clearly faulted [his] management
and his oversight of the scandal-ridden oil-for-food program
[Concerning Cotecna,] 'It's a continuous
history of us confronting them, their owning up to something and then
backtracking,' said Pieth, a professor of criminal law and criminology at
the University of Basel, in Switzerland. [He cited an April 2004 Cotecna letter, not
included in the report, which stated]
that after Kojo Annan left the
company in 1998, it paid him no more money. But the report issued Tuesday concluded that
Kojo Annan was paid as much as $484,000 after he left the
company." "Firm in UN scandal draws harsh criticism: Investigator disputes Annan comments", Associated Press, in the International Herald Tribune, March 31, 2005. "[The Volcker panel]
has delivered a mixed
verdict on Secretary General Kofi Annan. On the most explosive issue, the
panel largely exonerated Annan of personal corruption in
[awarding an oil-for-food
contract to Cotecna.]
But the panel faulted Annan for failing to
begin a serious investigation six years ago when his son's involvement
became known. This was a
grievous lapse, for which the United Nations is now paying the price as
critics accuse it of conflicts of interest and corruption in high places.
The Volcker panel argues persuasively that the
secretary-general should have referred the matter to UN investigators for
a more thorough inquiry. Had
it done so, the panel believes, Cotecna's contract would not have been
renewed repeatedly.
This latest report cites a lot of questionable
practices at UN headquarters.
Annan's former chief of staff authorized the destruction of files.
Even worse behaviour was shown by Kojo Annan
and Cotecna, who strove mightily to deceive [everyone] l
[After] a cavalier response
Kofi Annan
needs to demonstrate that he has learned from past mistakes and can still
by the strong, effective leader the United Nations needs so badly at this
time." "The verdict on Kofi Annan", International Herald Tribune, March 31, 2005. "Kofi Annan, the United Nations' embattled
secretary general, claims to have been 'exonerated' by the Volcker
committee's second report into the organisation's oil-for-food
scandal. He was not. The committee
did indeed find no
evidence of impropriety by Mr. Annan in the UN giving a hefty contact to
Cotecna, a Swiss firm that employed his son Kojo. But the report is riddled with
unanswered questions and ambiguities. Kojo, in particular, comes in for damning
criticism
accused of repeatedly lying, of seeking to conceal the true
nature of his relationship with Cotecna
and of refusing to co-operate
fully with the committee. The
committee will continue to investigate his role
and his 'financial
dealings
' [and, inter alia, it]
point[s] out
that Kojo had close contacts in the UN's procurement office
The committee's main conclusion is carefully
worded, not to say opaque.
This is hardly the full exoneration that Mr.
Annan wanted. Some of his
many American critics are once again baying for his blood. Asked this week if he would
resign, Mr. Annan's answer was clear: 'Hell, no!' But his reputation has been
besmirched, his credibility undermined and his moral authority badly
eroded." "Kofi, Kojo and a lot or shredded documents: There are still too many unanswered questions at the United Nations", The Economist, April 2d, 2005. [Note: For much more detail on this topic, see this archive's subsection on Iraq oil-for-food programme .] However, in early 2005
many other sharp criticisms of UN performance in its major areas of
operation, some of them quite devastating, also suddenly blossomed -- or
came to light. They include (at least) the following ten
items. "The United Nations controversial peacekeeping
operation in eastern Congo has received a further blow
[An internal report,]
obtained by the Financial Times, charged that UN
troops had not been tough enough in defending against renegade Congolese
Army commanders
It said this inaction called into question the 'very
purpose of the mission' and 'emboldened potential enemies of Monuc [the
peacekeeping mission]'
[which] threatened the shaky peace process
Among its criticisms, the report cited poor
leadership, misleading statements by the mission and the failure of a
commander to follow orders
The failure of the mission to use force during
the crisis 'smeared the mission with the taint of impotence and
cowardice', said the internally-commissioned report, and gave the
perception 'that it had again failed the Congolese people at a critical
moment.' Monuc is the UN's most expensive peacekeeping
operation, yet it has been widely criticized for incompetence, for failing
to protect civilians, and becoming mired in sex scandals.
A number of senior officials have since left
Monuc, but William Swing, the political head, remains in place. In February there were reports
that he would resign, but the UN later said he would complete his
term."
Andrew England, "UN report accuses peacekeepers of failing the Congolese people", Financial Times (UK), March 23, 2005. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on Peacekeeping .]
. "A U.N. report on peacekeeper sex abuse
released Thursday describes the U.N. military arm as deeply flawed and
recommends withholding salaries of the guilty and requiring nations to
pursue legal action against perpetrators. [The report] said abuses had been
reported in missions ranging from Bosnia and Kosovo to Cambodia, East
Timor, West Africa and Congo.
While allegations of abuse have dogged peacekeeping missions since
their inception 50 years ago, the issue was thrust into the spotlight
after the United Nations found [renewed problems in the Congo] earlier
this year.
One of the tasks of [Prince Zeid al Hussein,
Jordan's U.N. ambassador and author of the report], was finding ways to
hold peacekeepers more accountable
With the United Nations burdened by scandals
in the [Iraq] oil-for-food program and allegations of sexual harassment by
U.N. staff, officials have sought to deal with the peacekeeper sex abuse
issue quickly.
Zeid set 2007 as a target date to complete many
of his recommendations
"Parliaments, and especially those legislatures
of the largest contributors to the U.N. peacekeeping budget, may feel ill
at ease over continuing to extend support to peacekeeping in the absence
of any significant change,' Zeid said." "U.N. report: Peacekeeping ops troubled," Associated Press, March 24, 2005. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on Refugee sexual abuses .] "The United Nations Human Rights Commission,
the UN's principal forum for promoting human rights, opens its annual
six-week session today amid unprecedented criticism of its competence and
credibility. For years human rights groups have complained
of growing politicisation and double standards that have stifled debate
and allowed countries responsible for egregious abuses to escape
condemnation.
The authoritative high-level panel on UN
reform
last December said the reputation of the UN itself was threatened
by the commission's 'legitimacy deficit' and 'eroding credibility and
professionalism.' Kenneth Roth, head of New York-based Human
Rights Watch, reckons that about half the 53 members are there 'not to
promote human rights but to undermine them.'
If there is general agreement that the
commission is broken, there is less accord on how to fix it.
[Mr. Roth] and others argue that countries
with the worst human rights records should not be allowed to serve on the
commission. In addition, he says, countries seeking
membership should promise to promote human rights, for instance by
ratifying the main human rights treaties and issuing a standing invitation
for visits by UN human rights envoys. Only 50 countries have done this
so far." Frances Williams, "Double standards on human rights 'undermining UN'", Financial Times (UK), March 14, 2005. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on Human Rights .]
"Ever since [Secretary-General] Kofi Annan
put far-reaching political reform on the [UN] agenda
there has been a
danger that
enlargement of the UN Security Council -- would dominate the
agenda. It is by far the most
divisive issue, creating rivalry between leading members. It threatens to split the UN into
factions, and cause a deadlock that would bring the whole reform debate to
a standstill.
The UN must be more effective, but it also
needs to be more legitimate in the eyes of all its members. That is the case for enlarging the
Security Council and its permanent membership to include important
developing countries, such as India and Brazil, and the biggest
contributors, such as Germany and Japan, plus two more from Africa to keep
a global balance. Africa has yet to agree on its candidates
the
other four are competing vigorously for the 128 votes they need
[and
countries excluded] such as Italy and Mexico
want a more flexible
arrangement
The stage is
set for deadlock
Progress is urgent if the UN is not to become
a lame duck. If necessary,
Security Council reform will have to wait." "Saving the UN: Enlargement of the Security Council may have to wait", Financial Times (UK), April 18, 2005. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on the Security Council .] "Ruud Lubbers told Secretary General Kofi Annan
on Sunday that he was resigning as the high commissioner for refugees
because of a lack of confidence in him over sexual harassment
charges. 'The complaint of sexual harassment could not
be substantiated', Lubbers wrote [in his letter of resignation.]
[Earlier], Annan said there were insufficient
grounds to dismiss him. But on Friday, Annan consulted lawyers, clearly
angered at the resurgence of sexual harassment allegations after a
newspaper report that included graphic details.
[The] article appeared in the London newspaper
The Independent citing
previously unpublished details from the UN report last summer that
confirmed the sexual harassment charges.
Diplomats at the United Nations said
Lubbers
had fought the charges with a battery of prominent lawyers and that
Annan, consulting employment lawyers outside the United Nations, was
advised that Lubbers would win a legal test." "Embattled Lubbers resigns UN post", Associated Press, Warren Hoge, in the International Herald Tribune, February 21, 2005. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on UN Anti-harassment efforts .]
This week the United Nations published its
annual assessment of progress toward its Millennium Development Goals -
targets established in 2000 for advancing welfare in the developing
countries. The record, as you
might expect, is mixed.
It remains questionable, in fact, whether the
MDG exercise, with its unimpeachably good intentions and its proliferating
bureaucratic overhead, has done any good at all on balance.
The weakness of the whole MDG concept is that
it wills the ends without willing the means something which the UN,
perforce, has come to specialize in.
A plan to spend a specific allocation of aid on specific
interventions
could be judged for cost-effectiveness and ranked
alongside alternative ways of expending resources
A statement of good
intentions is unfortunately just that. The UN seems especially proud of the progress
[toward the goal]
in which it has a vested interest
greater global
co-operation on development.
Conferences, working groups, declarations,
strategies, and programmes
swearing allegiance to the MDG idea, are
multiplying fantastically. In
this sense, at least, the concept is a runaway success. However, what this is actually
doing for the putative poor country beneficiaries is harder to
say. Ends without means: The United Nations has set benchmarks for progress in poor countries. Are these any use?, The Economist, September 11th, 2004, p. 78. [Note: For further information on this topic, see
this archive's subsections on Lack of a strategy,
Grand lack of focus,
and A true global
strategy .]
"To hear Kofi Annan, the reforms he recommended
this week are some sort of make-or-break last chance to repair the United
Nations. On this, however,
the UN's secretary-general is surely wrong. Of two near-certainties about the
future of the organization, one is that it will continue to exist, not
least because most big powers, including habitual critics such as the
United States, will continue at times to find it useful
The other
certainty is that no reforms, however well-intentioned will turn the UN
into the perfect instrument millions of people seem to want -- one
capable, that is, of ordering international relations so that all states
obey the same rules, and especially rules that govern the use of
force. These ideas
do not -- indeed cannot -- solve
the underlying problem.
the absence of [political] will, not some legal
quibble
None of this means that Mr. Annan's ideas ought
to be rejected, or that the UN is not worth improving.
[For instance,]
it would be wonderful if Mr. Annan's proposal to buy out some of the UN's
existing staff ended up producing a secretariat that was selected on merit
rather than nationality." "Kofi Annan's reform plan: Some good ideas, but no revolution in the running of the world", The Economist, March 26th, 2005. [Note: IO Watch believes this succinct summation has much extra weight, because no media source has followed the UN so closely over the past few decades as has The Economist. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on Overall UN Reform Attempts.]
"
The United States and the European Union
should seize the opportunity presented by [Secretary-General Annan's
report on reforming and revitalizing the UN]
Some will want to start with some of the
report's bolder proposals
but
it is precisely on these issues that
agreement is likely to be most elusive. Therefore, it will be important
not to neglect or postpone other urgent aspects of the reform agenda where
near-term progress can and must be made.
Promises of assistance to developing
countries -- Annan is calling for the world's richest nations to set aside
0.7 percent of their gross national incomes by 2015 for aid to the
developing world -- will be meaningless so long as the many UN offices and
departments continue to operate in a disjointed and uncoordinated
fashion. Both Europe and the
US should be able to agree on an agenda for improving the effectiveness of
the UN's own development efforts, as well as the mechanisms for
coordination with other international assistance agencies."
George Moose, Edward W. Gnehm, and Karl F. Inderfurth, "UN reform: A crucial task for Europe and the U.S.", International Herald Tribune, April 9-10, 2005. [Note: for further information on this topic, see
this archive's subsection on Development
Assistance.] "Two
lawyers for U.N. whistle-blowers urged the United Nations on Wednesday to
protect staffers who want to disclose corruption at the world body,
including the oil-for-food program for Iraq. One of the lawyers said 'five or six' U.N. employees including
a high-level employee had contacted him for advice on how to reveal
evidence of wrongdoing in [that]
programme without jeopardizing their
careers.
Andre Sirois -- himself a U.N. staff member and
former whistle-blower ---
said
'In one case it
was something big, that definitely would make the front page
' But based on his
advice, none of [them]
have gone public, he said. 'I know them. They won't. They are very quiet and under a
lot of stress.'
While U.N. rules
call for wrongdoers to be punished, they do nothing to shield staff
members from reprisals when they come forward with evidence, [Tom] Devine and Sirois
said. 'There is
irreparable harm when freedom of speech is canceled, irreparable harm to
the institution,' Devine said.
'The message is, 'Do not say anything to investigators.' '
An independent U.N. inquiry led by [Paul
Volcker is investigating]
whether any U.N. employees received bribes or
allowed kickbacks."
Irwin Arief, "Lawyers call on U.N. to shield whistle-blowers", Reuters, December 15, 2004. [Note: For further information on this topic, see
this archive's subsections on Disappearing
Whistle-blowers and
Suppressed
whistle-blowers .] "'The only thing we've gotten is small packets
of food and supplies', says
[an Indonesian tsunami victim.] 'Where the money is, we don't
know. It's just meetings,
meetings, meetings.'
Last week, Indonesia's state auditing agency
said it was having difficulty accounting for portions of more than $4
billion it has received so far
As the months have passed, government action
has been delayed. [A
draft plan]
is a daunting thing; it comes in twelve volumes.
The government faces a huge and complex
task. It .. must rebuild
entire economic and social environments. But none of this seems to explain the silence
of the barren city landscape
[and] many fishing villages have simply
disappeared.
As recovery inches forward
it will encounter
conflicts over inheritance and land ownership, bureaucratic inefficiency,
competition among aid groups and among government departments and, with so
much money flooding in, the possibility of corruption on a gigantic scale.
Torn by unending war and political repression,
battered by a natural disaster that may strike again, paralyzed by a
reconstruction effort that just cannot seem to get started, Aceh today is
not a place of hope." Seth Mydans, "Months after disaster, smashed Indonesian city is still a ghost town: Paralyzed by a reconstruction effort that has yet to get off the ground", International Herald Tribune, April 6, 2005. [Note: For further information on this topic, see this archive's subsection on the UN coordination of tsunami aid? .] The initial UN
Secretariat responses by Mr. Annan and senior UN officials in the winter
and early spring of 2004-2005 to all these emerging allegations of UN
mismanagement, weak impact, and poor performance, were initially fairly
reasonable as the damage control effort began. "Two of the world's most impressive spin
machines are locked in deadly conflict. On the one side is [the so-called]
'vast right-wing conspiracy', a bunch of conservative US senators and
congressmen,
[plus several major media organizations], all calling for
the head of United Nations Secretary-General Kofi
Annan. On the other side is the huge amorphous mass of
the global great and good, all clucking in unison that Kofi Annan is the
best UN secretary-general since Dag Hammarskjold
although a list that
includes Kurt Waldheim and Boutros Boutros-Ghali is not much competition.
Led by [some political leaders, reinforced by some major governments,
newspaper editorial boards, and news bulletins]
, the international establishment
has rallied to Annan as the first African to run the world body, and as
the first secretary-general to bring forward thoughtful and even bold
plans for UN reform. Kofi Annan must stay, they all cry, most of
them thrilling to the symbolism of a clash between President George Bush,
who proudly sports a small American flag on his lapel, and Nobel peace
prize laureate Kofi Annan, whose equally well-tailored lapel sports a
discreet dove, tastefully wrought in white enamel." Martin Walker, "Gunning for Kofi", The Spectator, December 11, 2004.
"Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Tuesday [at
his year-end news conference] that allegations of corruption in the
oil-for-food programme had 'cast a shadow' over the United Nations and
made 2004 an especially troubled year for the international
organization. But he said he
was optimistic for the future. 'No doubt that this has been a particularly
difficult year, and I am relieved that this annus horibilus is coming to
an end', he said
'There has been lots of criticism against the
UN, particularly with allegations surrounding the oil-for-food program,'
he said. 'These are serious
allegations, we take them seriously and this is why we are doing
everything we can to get to the bottom of this.
Asked if he would accept personal blame or
admit to mistakes, he said he preferred to await the outcome of the
Volcker investigation before commenting. 'On the question of my possible resignation,'
he said, 'let me say that I have quite a lot of work to do and, as you
have indicated, I have the confidence and the support of the member
states." Warren Hoge, "'A
particularly difficult year' for the UN, Annan says", International
Herald Tribune, December 22, 2004.
[Note" See also , in
more detail, Mark Turner, "UN puts its future up for debate in biggest
challenge yet: The international organization has been through a testing
period but even tougher battles lie ahead", Financial Times (UK),
December 21, 2004.]
"The crisis meeting of veteran foreign policy
experts in a Manhattan apartment one recent Sunday was held in agreed-upon
secrecy. The high-profile guest of honor [Kofi Annan]
came unaccompanied by his usual retinue of aides
The mission, in the
worlds of one participant, was clear -- 'to save Kofi and rescue the
UN." [Annan]
listened quietly to three and a half
hours of bluntly worded counsel from a group united in their regard for
him and support for the United Nations, but deeply concerned that lapses
in his leadership over the past two years had eclipsed the accomplishments
of his first term and were jeopardizing chances of making the remaining
two years of his term meaningful. They began by arguing that Annan had to refresh
his top management team.
The larger argument
[addressed the need] to
move aggressively to repair relations with Washington
[and] to restore
his relationship with his own bureaucracy, where workers felt his office
protected high-level officials accused of
misconduct. One participant, who requested anonymity, said
that Annan
made no promises -- nor was asked to -- at its
end." Warren Hoge, "Frank words for Annan in effort to revitalize UN", International Herald Tribune, January 11, 2005. [Note: Interestingly, almost all the other attendees at the meeting were Americans.]
"Mark Malloch Brown has spent the past few days
hopping from one disaster-struck region in Asia to the next. Meanwhile, [he]
is also charged
with seeing the United Nations through one of the most trying periods in
its 59-year history. Plagued
by allegations of corruption, inefficiency and even irrelevance, the world
body will need urgent attention
[He said] 'The United Nations needs to take a
good hard look at itself and go through a series of management reforms to
make ourselves more effective.
I think people acknowledge the UNDP is a very
successful example of U.N. reform.
[Mr. Annan] made it clear in appointing me
that it was that kind of management turnaround success [that we had] at
UNDP
that he wants to see brought into the United Nations proper. And the emphasis
on
communications.
We will see if we can repeat the trick at the United
Nations.
Now
the critics are a lot tougher and meaner,
and the standard of the bar set a lot higher. I know my lines, I know the part,
and we'll see what the critics have to say in the
morning." "The last word: Mark Malloch Brown", Newsweek
International, January 17, 2005. "The man appointed to oversee a management
shake-up at the United Nations has warned that it must brace itself for
wide-ranging reform
'The crisis is still building,' [Mark] Malloch Brown said. 'It's
very hard after [last] week's revelations to believe there isn't going to
be some pretty tough stuff on management.' Paul [Volcker's group] last week criticized the
UN for its limited response to internal audits showing irregularities in
the $65 billion [Iraq oil-for-food] programme.
Mr. Malloch Brown also warned that it was no
longer only the institution's traditional, conservative critics that were
calling for a shake-up. Mr. Volcker also claimed the volume of
allegations surrounding the former [head of the Iraq] programme, Benon
Sevan, suggested there must have been some 'monkey
business.' At the end of January Mr. Volcker will issue
his preliminary findings.
'That may be a transition point', Mr. Malloch Brown said
'It should be a mainstream preoccupation of
every government share holder of the UN.' ,,, A reshuffle of Mr. Annan's cabinet would take
place within six weeks, maybe sooner, he said.
The management shuffle would be followed by
'human accountability' reforms addressing other recent
scandals." Mark Turner, "UN warned to get ready for sweeping reforms", Financial Times (UK), January 17, 2005. "Reaffirming his pledge to act resolutely on
any findings of staff misconduct in connection with the United Nations
Oil-for-Food programme for Iraq, Secretary-General Kofi Annan today
announced
disciplinary
proceedings against officials involved in the operation and
broader
management measures in response to the [release of the Volcker panel
report on ]
the management
of the now-defunct relief effort. 'Should any findings of the Inquiry give rise
to criminal charges, the United Nations will cooperate with national law
enforcement authorities pursuing those charges, and
I will waive the
diplomatic immunity of the staff member concerned,' Mr. Annan said in the
statement
The statement noted the [Volcker panel's]
intention to publish a further interim report dealing with [his son Kojo's
involvement, which Mr. Annan awaited]
'with a clear conscience'
'
[Spokesman Mark] Malloch Brown acknowledged
that 'we're dealing with critical and vital breakdowns in the management
of the UN'
[On the inadequate UN auditing process, he
stated that] 'we'll have to look again at what we can do to strengthen the
external independence of audit, to strengthen the assurance that it will
have the resources it needs to do the task'
" "Acting on Oil-for-Food report, Annan takes disciplinary action, further management steps", UN News Service, 3 February 2005.
"No one at the United Nations doubts that big
change is necessary for the institution to regain its footing and restore
its name.
Under prodding, [Kofi] Annan is shedding most
of his inner circle
[to replace these 'traditionalists' with
'modernists.'] Shake up a bureaucracy as entrenched as the
United Nations, and people get nervous.
[Long-time observer Edward Luck said]
'In the
early '90s the UN got too ambitious on the operational scale.
[Then and
since]
it got overly zealous in building norms, setting international
law and trying to regulate state behavior.' He also faulted the United Nations for
developing a sense of moral superiority over the pursuit of national
ambitions. 'It was as if
national interests are by definition base and narrow and mean-spirited,'
he said. 'Somehow if you're a global citizen, that's
superior to being a patriot,' said [former US ambassador to the UN]
Richard Holbrooke. He said
the United Nations had erred in placing itself above its member
states. '
that's not
acceptable to the big powers, and not just the U.S. The Chinese and the
Russians and countries like India also won't accept the UN as senior to
them.'" Warren Hoge, "For the beleaguered UN, a dance of reinvention", International Herald Tribune, February 25, 2005. [Note: this important point about UN officials'
self-righteousness and arrogance as "global guardians" during the past
decade is an important one, not least because the quotes which follow
below suggest that a lot of Secretariat (and loyal supporter) arrogance is still left in
2005. See also this archive's
subsections on The UN and Global
Governance , UN Moral Values and Rectitude - For
Others , and many subsections
of The UN, Alone and
UNaccountable
.]
So far, not bad. However, the old patterns of UN
defensive response to outside pressure for management reform then began to
assert themselves, in a steadily more aggressive
fashion. A first, nuanced
defense of Mr. Annan, as a forward-looking "modernist" trying to drag an
entrenched UN culture into the world of modern management, was made by
John Ruggie, an academic who served for several years as an
assistant-secretary general under Mr. Annan (and who attended the "crisis"
advisory meeting with Mr. Annan in December 2004.) It was, in turn, firmly
rebutted by David Rieff. "
Throughout my own tenure at the UN [I
witnessed]
an ongoing tension between traditionalist and modernist
corporate cultures
In the traditionalist view, the accountability
of the UN begins, and ends, with member states
The modernist culture, in
contrast, appreciates that accountability is also owed to a variety of
other internal and external stakeholders: UN staff, national legislatures,
civic groups and the general public.
Whereas traditionalists treat opaqueness as a strategic asset, for
modernists transparency is the key to institutional
success. If any good can come out of the 'horrible year'
just passed, it will be the permanent victory of the modernists.
Mr. Annan is by instinct a modernist who won
the 2001 Nobel Peace Prize for "bringing new life" to the UN.
He [has]
acknowledged the need
to learn from the oil-for-food debacle and signaled his renewed commitment
to institutional reform. As
he goes about rebuilding his senior management team, he would be well
advised to add to each job description: only modernists need to
apply." John Ruggie, "Modernists must take over the United Nations, Financial Times (UK), January 24, 2005.
| |||
