Overview of IO Watch Archive Quotes XV,

July-August  2008

755.      [In 1995 the UN Secretariat top leadership was forced to make a major mea culpa for poor human resource management and promise strong reform efforts.  Not much happened.  A decade later a departing Kofi Annan called for urgent revitalization of the international civil service, with emphasis on accountability, mobility, and new contractual arrangements.  But under Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon progress in implementing human resources reforms has been awkward and controversial.

            A very important new article by John Mathiason,  a 26-year UN veteran, offers a surprising and incisive analysis of this situation and urges serious corrective action.  Inter alia, he notes that UN system staff  increased 135 percent between 1986 and 2005 (mostly in extrabudgetary funds and peacekeeping work.)  In 1997, a third of UN Secretariat staff had less than five years service; in 2005, it was half.  In 2007, 62 percent of UN staff were assigned to peacekeeping missions, tribunals, or other field posts. Only half the staff are on stable (series 100) contracts: over 5,000 (15 percent) are on contracts of less than one year without full employment benefits.

            Focusing on the UN itself as the dominant model, he notes that the UN Charter requires the highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity in staffing matters, but effectiveness (which requires both competence and integrity) is missing.   

            To help achieve an effective international civil service for the 21^st century, he suggests: a thorough analysis of recruitment practices and results; reviewing how staff performance is assessed (presently not well, but with various experiments under way); recognizing that contractual arrangements for staff are becoming more complicated and less fair; and revisiting the issue of permanent contracts in the context of what “career” in the international public service now means. Finally, past international civil servants’ positive values and effective actions should be examined to help instill those values in new staff members. 

            Mr. Mathiason concludes by urging the Secretary-General to engage all involved in a serious reflection on the future of the international civil service; quickly, before reform proposals based on impressions or even bad data lead to throwing the baby (the international public service) out with the bathwater (reform.)]

John Mathiason, “What kind of international civil service do we need for the twenty-first century?”,   Global Governance, Vol. 14, No. 2,  April-June 2008, pp. 127-133.    [Note: for strong confirmation of all this, see item 696 which begins Overview Quotes XIV.   Mr. Mathiason is also the author of Invisible governance: International secretariats in global politics, Kumarian, 2007.]    

756a.    “While the UN Development Program is resisting the recommendation by the UN Ethics Office … that it pay 14 months compensation to the whistleblower who exposed irregularities in its North Korea programs, a fresh whistleblower … [from UNDP’s Somalia program  complains about a UNDP cover-up] … with multiple interrogators and Dutch connections.

            … [Ismael Ahmed says UNDP] appointed a Dutch firm to investigate his case. … The [UNDP Somalia official who acted to terminate him] is a Dutch national, as is [UNDP number- two] Ad Melkert, who visited [Somalia] in October 2007 … [and] approved the decision to … end his contract.  We’ll have more on this. …

            [Further, consider] UNDP’s defense of Eveline Herfkens, who took $280,000 from the Dutch government while ostensibly working for UNDP, with New Zealand military personnel who … face court martial.  ‘Prime Minister Helen Clark said … it was intolerable for Defense Force Personnel on United Nations postings to double-dip on their housing allowances.  It will be got to the bottom of, and … if there’s been wrong done there must be action taken.’

            Herfkens, on the other hand, refused to pay back any of the money, and UNDP continues to defend her.”

Matthew Russell Lee, “UNDP whitewashing Somalia whistleblower’s claims, resists UN ethics Office on backpay for N. Korea whistleblower”, Inner City Press, July 1. 2008.

756b.    “For nearly a year, the U.N.’s first ethics commissioner, Robert Benson, tried to take up the case of a whistleblower who drew attention to … [misconduct in the UNDP’s North Korea program.  Now, at the initiative of Benson], the question is whether the UNDP would pay restitution for the harm done to … the same whistleblower. …

            A refusal to follow the recommendation would be a direct slap at the UN’s top ethics official … and … again expose the world’s organization to charges of double standards.  Moreover, it would be a highly public blow to Benson’s boss, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who is standing behind his ethics chief. …

            Benson ‘s effort was clearly a compromise aimed at preserving unified standards of fairness across the U. N. system to employees who dare to testify to their organization’s lapses.  And Ban’s current support for his ethics chief – though still equivocal – shows a desire to undo some of the damage done by his earlier flinching at UNDP intransigence. … But if UNDP does not accept the ethics officer’s ruling, what then?”

George Russell, “Analysis: Does the United Nations accept the rule of Law?”, Fox News, July 03, 2008.    [Note: The full article, available under “World” then “United Nations” at www.foxnews.com, includes the full text of Mr. Benson’s letter recommending restitution.]

756c.    “The Government Accountability Project (GAP) applauds United Nations Ethics Office Director Robert Benson and Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for defending a whistleblower who was denied due process by the United Nations Development Program.

            The [report of the External Independent Investigative Review Panel] demonstrates investigative incompetence, ignorance of the standard of proof in whistleblower cases, and the gratuitous defamation of a whistleblower who tried to protect UNDP from misconduct,’ said Bea Edwards, International Program Director. …

            The panel itself was not appointed in an independent manner.  Its members lacked the impartiality and expertise needed to investigate these disclosures properly, as demonstrated by the fact that members inappropriately devoted a significant portion of their report to attacking [Artjon] Shkurtaj rather than investigating the retaliation described above and easily verified.  In fact, the panel’s report was, in itself, retaliatory.”

“GAP commends UN ethics director and Secretary-General for defending UNDP whistleblower”,  Government Accountability Project, at www.whistleblower.org, July 4, 2008.    [For the UNDP report itself, see Overview Quotes XIV, item  725.]  

757a.    “UN personnel around the world are increasingly likely to be targets for attack because the organization is perceived by some as a tool of powerful members, rather than an unbiased advocate for all nations, according to a global study on the security of UN staff members. …

            The study concluded that neither individual staff members nor the organization had fully grasped the change in perceptions, [said study head] Lakhdar Brahimi.  ‘All of us who work for the UN, we continue to think of ourselves as good guys. … We need to realize that our flag is not enough protection.’         … The study was conducted by a 7-member panel that was organized after 17 UN workers were killed in a bombing in Algiers last December. …

            [Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon], following a recommendation of the panel, has set up a separate group to examine responsibility for shortcomings within the organization.”

Neil MacFarquhar, “UN personnel seen as increasingly at risk of attack”, International Herald Tribune, July 2, 2008.

757b.    “[The UN Staff Union … welcomes the bulk of the recommendations of Mr. Brahimi’s panel] … but is not enthused by the appointment of Mr. Ralph Zacklin – an insider who has served as a legal counsel of the United Nations peacekeeping operations – to head an ‘independent’ accountability group that will review the responsibilities of the key individuals and offices connected with the … [Algiers attack.]         

            Reliance on senior UN officials to conduct a peer review on accountability issues has proven to be a failure in the past, a situation which the long overdue reform of the internal justice [system] is expected to rectify.”

“In response to Brahimi report, committee on staff security calls for Secretary-General to take immediate action”, United Nations Staff Union, New York, Press Release, 3 July 2008.     [Note: the full letter is available at http://u-seek.org,  as are two other recent and important Staff Union letters, one of 28 May 2008 on the many serious weaknesses and  manipulations by the UN leadership of the much-ballyhooed  new UN internal justice system, and another of 16 May 2008 on the worsening UN staff/management relationships which first arose under Kofi Annan and continue on under Mr. Ban.]

758.      “When the United Nations Security Council adopted a key resolution last month critical of violence against women, the condemnation was also directed at the increasing number of peacekeepers, mostly soldiers, expelled from U.N. missions on charges of rape or sexual abuse. …

            ‘The United Nations is not helpless when it comes to holding peacekeepers accountable for sexual violence,’ says … [an NGO human rights spokesperson.  The UN can] ‘work much more actively to ensure that governments hold peacekeepers criminally accountable … [and] make criminal accountability for criminal behaviour a condition of U.N. peacekeeping service through waiver of immunity so that peacekeepers could be tried in the countries where the violations take place.’ …

            [Another expert said] … ‘The Security Council resolution is another useful instrument in the effort to get better documentation and prosecution of sexual abuse and violence against women in conflict.’ … ‘Now it is indisputably on the agenda … [but there must be] an ongoing commitment to addressing this issue and recognition that it requires continual attention and resources, not just good rhetoric.’”

Thalif Deen, “U.N. lacks muscle to fight sex abuse in peacekeeping”, IPS Inter Press Service, July 2, 2008.

759.      “This week, Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe preened with the other African leaders, seemingly oblivious to Security Council calls … [for negotiations] after a flawed election. … In Iran, physicists continue to enrich uranium despite three U.N. Security Council resolutions to halt the process. 

            … Why do some world leaders and their governments so flagrantly reject supposedly binding U.N. resolutions?  ‘A Security Council resolution … is often weak or unclear,’ [said one expert.]  … ‘The council has been devalued.’ …

            [A] devout respect for sovereignty can produce watered-down resolutions. … The council is hamstrung not only by its veto-wielding members … but by other powers with military or political influence in the situation at hand. … ‘A huge segment of the world’s population in Africa and Asia and Latin America are adamantly opposed to intervention within internal affairs, even to stop egregious human rights violations,’ [says another expert.]

            … ‘The council has been blocked from effective action for most of its history,’ [said a third  observer.]  ‘But what we are talking about now is … that even when we get some level of agreement, it has a low level of impact in the outside world.’”

Betsy Pisik, “U.N. ambiguity adds to image as paper tiger”, The Washington Times, July 4, 2008.

760a.    “Clubs are all too often full of people prattling on about things they no longer know about.  On July 7^th the leaders of the group that allegedly runs the world ... gather to review the world economy. … But what is the point … without anybody from the emerging world?  Cigar smoke and ignorance are in the air.           … As global problems proliferate and information whips round the world ever faster, the organizational response looks ever shabbier, slower and feebler.  The world’s governing bodies need to change.   There has always been an excuse for putting off reform. … But now calls for change are coming thick and fast. …

            Any solution must accept three constraints.  First, better institutions will not solve intractable problems. … Second, no matter how you reform the clubs’ membership rules, somebody somewhere will feel left out.  Third, you cannot start again. … The modern age must build on what already exists. …

            [If the rich world clings] to power, .. China and India will form their own clubs. … Cede power and bind them in, and interests and problems are shared.  Now that would be a decent way to run a world.”

“What a way to run the world”, and “Who runs the world?  Wrestling for influence”, The Economist, July 5^th, 2008, cover story and pages 15 and 35-38 respectively.     [Note: IO Watch believes that this broad framework, like that proposed for international civil service reforms in item 755 above, is a key tipping point for action by governments and the UN (and is enhanced by the two following items.)  Will the international organizations  continue their recent drop in reputation and effectiveness, or finally enact far-reaching and much-needed reforms for the 21^st century?]

760b.    “As authors of the Princeton Project on National Security report that first proposed a “Concert of Democracies”, we believe that … the pre-eminent need today is … renewal of the world’s global architecture  – the UN, Bretton Woods and the Group of Eight leading nations.  A Concert of Democracies can be helpful.

            We are urging the world’s democracies … to work together … to renew and expand world governance capacities. …  Common interests … begin with widening the circles of global decision-making, …  [retrofitting] the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank … to make globalisation work for everyone, … [and achieving] the long-awaited expansion of the G8 to a G13 or a G16. …

            Some critics fear that a Concert of Democracies would amplify American power and the resistance to it. … In fact, it would be a more effective multilateral council to check rash, unilateral US initiatives. …

            The next American president should … explore support for … reform of existing global institutions.  If such support exists, and we suggest it does, America should … join with other democracies in making those institutions reflect the global distribution of power among all countries in the 21st century.”

John Ikenberry and Anne-Marie Slaughter, “Democracies must work in concert”, Financial Times (UK), July 11, 2008.

760c.    “The place to start … [in making the United Nations and other institutions more relevant] is to abolish the … [G8] in favour of the Group of 20, which draws members from all continents, represents two-thirds of the world’s population and accounts for 90 percent of all economic activity. 

            The G20 has existed only since 1999 but already has done a great deal to build consensus on global issues … [through] central bank governors and finance ministers.  But the mounting urgency of planet-wide problems … requires the participation of world leaders and foreign ministers. … [This would] also help circumvent the sterile debate over reforming the UN Security Council. …

            The G20 … is one of the rare world forums that reflects geographic, political and economic balance.  Beyond the G8 members, [it] offers a voice for Latin America through Brazil and Argentina.  From Asia, (besides Japan) there is China, India, South Korea and Indonesia.  Saudi Arabia represents the Gulf and Middle East, while South Africa accounts for the sub-Saharan region.

            The breadth of the G20 offers hope of restoring public faith in institutions of global governance, … … rather than the narrow agenda of elite industrial powers.”

William Drozdiak, “America’s president must back the Group of Twenty”, Financial Times (UK), July 3, 2008.    [Note: in the numbers game, the G20 seems clearly better than a G8, G13, or G 16.  Information on a closely-related and useful proposal for an “L-20” group is found in  Overview Quotes X, item 507f.   In both cases, the 192-nation UN would continue on, but be recognized as unable to deal effectively with pressing 21^st century global decision-making needs, because of the “talk-shop” problems of its enormous membership, fragmentation, and polarization.]   

761.      “One of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s two entities finished May with just €221 [about $350] in its treasury.  The acute state of the Muslin-Croat federation’s finances has raised questions about the long-term stability of the Balkan state. …

            Over-generous payments to veterans of the 1992-1995 Bosnian war have drained the federation budget, which the International Monetary Fund last week said was in the grip of a severe ‘liquidity squeeze,’ although not yet bankrupt. … The country’s other entity, a Serb-dominated republic, fiercely protective of its autonomy, has fared better. …

            The federation’s financial crisis has simmered for years as successive governments heaped on generous new benefits without enough economic growth.  Foreign aid has fallen sharply since the first decade of postwar reconstruction.”

Neil MacDonald, “Bosnia faces calls for talks on cash crisis”, Financial Times, July 7, 2008.     [Note: with a global economic recession looming, how many other newer nation states may be in a similar fix, and who will bail them out?]

762a.    “Transparency International strongly supports the view … [that the UK should] act to end ‘unacceptable delays in overseas corruption inquiries.’ …

            Against that backdrop, the Serious Fraud Office’s consideration of the US approach to confronting foreign bribery can be worthwhile if properly adopted.  In addition to vigorous prosecutions, ‘deferred prosecution agreements’ can be a useful additional tool.

            Far from letting companies off lightly, such agreements generally require companies to admit wrongdoing, pay stiff penalties, co-operate in ongoing investigations (which can lead to criminal prosecution of individuals) and – vital to future prevention – to implement anti-bribery compliance programmes and engage an independent compliance monitor for up to three years to report back to the government on its findings. …

            In the US, use of deferred prosecution agreements has allowed prosecutors to investigate and effectively ‘settle’ many more cases than otherwise.”

Nancy Z. Boswell, ,”President, Transparency International-USA, “SFO can learn from US approach to corruption”,  Financial Times (UK), July 7, 2008.

762b.    “Survivors of  the 1995 Serb assault that killed 8,000 Muslims in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica cannot sue the UN in the Netherlands for failing to protect their families, a Dutch court ruled Thursday.  ‘The court … has no jurisdiction’ … read [the] judgement. … ‘The Court concludes that in international law practice the absolute immunity of the UN is the norm and is respected.’ …

                        The plantiffs comprise a group calling itself the ‘Mothers of Srebrenica.’ … The district court … [ordered] the original plaintiffs to pay the costs of the matter.   Alix Hagedorn, [their lawyer,] said they would appeal the decision and approach the European Court of Human Rights if unsuccessful.  ‘That the UN has unlimited immunity even if a genocide happens, we can’t accept,’ he said.

            The remains of thousands of victims have been found in mass graves around Srebrenica since the end of Bosnia’s 1992-1995 war.  In 2002, the entire Dutch government resigned over an official report that stated its peacekeepers had been sent on an ‘impossible’ mission.  The UN has also admitted it failed to protect the Muslims of Srebrenica from mass murder, but none of its officials were held responsible.”

“Dutch court agrees UN has absolute immunity in Srebrenica massacre claim”, Agence-France Press, July 10, 2008.      [Note:  so UN “absolute immunity” continues to be “respected.”  Bad for the genocide victims and families, bad for “international law practice,” bad for the global rule of law and the (exempt) UN’s many pronouncement about it, and bad for the UN’s reputation.  But good for UN senior officials and managers who should, and otherwise would, be held fully and legally accountable for any corruption and mismanagement.  What a cleansing a serious anti-fraud regime, such as the one described in the item immediately above,  could bring to the UN, the UNDP, and other UN system operations!  But at least the Srebrenica mothers’ case moves steadfastly on.]

763a.    “Here … [in Geneva] large chunks of what should be the best of the United Nations are quietly being taken hostage.  Perhaps it’s the DNA of failure that’s embedded in the walls of the old Palais des Nations where the League of Nations once met, and failed …

            [Human rights expert] Ruth Wedgwood writes that ‘regional politics still drags like a befouled trawler net across the ideals of the United Nations organization.’ … The 132 members of the so-called Group of 77 … and its 56-member Islamic subset have effectively hijacked [and use] the entire human rights process … to beat up on Israel. …

            [What is not on] the agenda?  Darfur … Zimbabwe …and a $9 million sequel [next year] to the 2001 Durban World Conference Against Racism where … distasteful rants were featured in the debates … and broadcast around the world. …

            [Human rights head Louise]  Arbour battled gamely against efforts by the Human Rights Council to gain control over her office. Now it’s vacant.  It’s up to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon … [hopefully]  to move quickly to ensure at least a single voice of reason and … some even-handedness in the international human rights agenda.”

David A. Andelman, “The UN befouls Lac Leman”, huffingtonpost.com, July 7, 2008.

763b.    “The Palais des Nations [in Geneva] is crumbling.  Built more than 70 years ago to house the United Nations' predecessor and then largely neglected … the historic complex urgently needs repairs that could cost more than $1 billion. …

            Annexes completed in 1952 and 1973 created extra room for the 4,000 staff now working in the Palais … But the sprawling complex -- with 37 acres (15 hectares) of floorspace … has never had a thorough refurbishment and falls short of modern safety and energy standards. …

            U.N. facilities often fall into disrepair because donor governments are loathe to spend aid money on upgrading buildings at the expense of other projects such as the distribution of life-saving food and medicine … [and United Nations’ financial records] track only the funds received and spent, without weighing [the status of] long-term capital assets such as buildings or vehicles.             …

            Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [has] indicated he would support renovations for Geneva once the $1.9 billion New York facelift is complete, … [which is expected] in mid-2013.”

Laura MacInnis, “U.N.’s Geneva office repairs will cost millions”, Reuters, July 1, 2008.

764.      “The International Criminal Court is facing its own indictment.  Its critics charge that its work is often counter-productive. … [but international justice could become] a nightmare. …

             [As Angela Jolie wrote recently] ‘Only through justice will we achieve peace.’  …  [But] this emotionally satisfying formula is too neat, … and may in fact be working against peace. …

            [Ever since Charles Taylor of Liberia was first given amnesty in Nigeria but then turned over to a special court in Sierra Leone], offers of amnesty to dictators are now much less likely to be credible. …    The co-authors of a book on Sudan say that indicting Sudan’s president now would be ‘gambling with the future of the entire Sudanese nation.’ … At present, once an ICC indictment is issued it can never be withdrawn.  This ensures that despots such as … [Sudan’s Omar Hassan al-Bashir] know that … they will never be free of the threat of prosecution. …              

            Of course, granting amnesties to despots and killers is a bad business.  But –  faced with a choice between peace and justice, and the rights of the living and … the dead --  priority should be given to peace and the living.”

Gideon Rachman, “When peace and justice collide”, Financial Times (UK), July 8, 2008.    [Note: the full article is available at Google Search under the author and title.]

765a.    “The Japanese made sure this year’s G8 summit saw little of the angry protest that has marred so many similar gatherings. …

            On substance, however, the G8 leaders rose to the challenges posed by the ‘three F’s’ – food, fuel and the financial credit crunch -- with platitudes.  The big disappointment was over climate change … [where] the G8’s commitment starts to crumble under scrutiny … [with one cynical Russian diplomat  noting the absurdity of today’s politicians taking responsibility to meet goals] … four decades from now.

            … The G8 could not come up even with nearer-term goals to cut emissions -- say, by 2020.  … ]An expert said this lack] underscores an ’abdication of responsibility.’ … A Japanese diplomat worries that … [relations between] the G8 and the so-called G5 (India, China, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa) over climate change may soon resemble management and labour stand-offs at their worst. …

            Big challenges demand strong leaders. … [But] in all the big democracies (as well as elsewhere) the three F’s have … [helped] create a mood of dissatisfaction. … Leaders find themselves punished, and also hobbled, by the low regard in which they are held by their voters.”

“They came, they jawed, they failed to conquer”, The Economist, July 12^th, 2008.

765b.    “The defining idea behind the G-8 is that all its members confront global challenges and work together to solve them. But that premise is being sorely tested this week.  …

            Tomorrow’s crises have arrived, and they are intertwined. … But the cause of … [inaction  is] the determination of each G-8 leader to defend his or her country’s perceived interests, above a common global interest. …

            This is a vicious cycle. The developed and the developing countries must all cooperate in escaping from the carbon age.  The old model of national interests conflicting with the interest of humanity is a danger to G-8 members and every other country in the world.”

“Whose national interests?  Rich nations, poor policies”, The Boston Globe, in the International Herald Tribune, July 10, 2008.

765c.    “Yesterday … world leaders sat down to an 18-course gastronomic extravaganza at a G8 summit in Japan, which is focusing on the food crisis.

            The dinner, and a six-course lunch, ... included delicacies such as caviar, milkfed lamb, sea urchin and tuna, with champagne and wines flown in from Europe and the US. …

            On Sunday Gordon Brown suggested we … [should make our shopping go further.]  It was vital to reduce ‘unnecessary demand’ for food, he said.  … [But, as an NGO official observed] ‘It is deeply hypocritical that they should be lavishing course after course on world leaders when there is a food crisis and millions cannot afford a decent meal.’”

James Chapman, “Summit that’s hard to swallow”, The Daily Mail (UK), July 8, 2008.

765d.    “Even by the dismal standards of these events, this year’s G8 summit in Japan was a wearisome spectacle.”

Clive Crook, Financial Times (UK), ft.com, July 11, 2008.

766.      ““Three decades ago, many pundits were saying that an ever-rising population could lead to global disaster.  … [Happily] technological innovation, economic dynamism and successful population-control strategies have helped defuse that bomb, or at least delay its detonation. …

            But there is a second, less happy population story. … Things still look bleak for the poorest people in the world. … [A new World Bank report shows] that 35 countries (31 of them in sub-Saharan Africa) are lagging badly, with sky-high fertility rates and limited access to family planning tools.  Money is not the main reason. … [State agencies] are often inefficient, understaffed, and incapable of working properly in rural areas. …

            Politics clearly plays a role. … [In addition to anti-abortion attitudes, there is] flagging political momentum … [as success] has sapped donors’ enthusiasm. … [Yet  report co-author Sadia Chowdhury cites success in] her native Bangladesh:  she says political will and female empowerment can make all the difference even in a poor country. …

            And there are some other positive signs on the political front.  The UN has recently, and not before time, decided that population control should be one of its much-vaunted Millennium Development Goals.”

“Population control: The marathon’s not over”, The Economist, July 12^th, 2008.

767.      ““The failure of the [UN] Security Council to agree a set of modest sanctions against Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe's henchmen - such as a freeze on financial assets and a travel ban - speaks volumes about the reality of the UN. …

            No civilised nation can regard Mr Mugabe's behaviour as anything other than obscene. But decisions of the Security Council … are based on realpolitik. The UN's very constitution as a body including some of the most brutal dictatorships on the planet necessitates that. …

            The idea that the UN holds some special legitimacy and moral worth is not merely naive - it can make a bad situation worse.   Mugabe now claims that he has been exonerated by the UN.  Had the UN not existed, no attention would be paid to … [Russia and China’s failure] to criticise him, because that is entirely to be expected. And if … the EU's member states were to impose stronger sanctions, that would not be seen as somehow in opposition to the UN.

            The UN has never had greater moral legitimacy than any other ad hoc assemblage of states. ,,, It is time to say goodbye to [its] moral bankruptcy.”

Stephen Pollard, “The UN decision on Zimbabwe is based on neither morality nor decency”, The Times (UK), timesonline, July 14, 2008.

768a.    “Sir David Veness, the first head of a U.N. Security Department, has resigned on 24 June … [taking] full responsibility for any security lapse … [in] the deadly terrorist attack against U.N. facilities in Algiers last December. When the former U.K. police chief took over a newly established Department, many of us wondered whether … [it was a] Public Relations gesture; not a real security measure.  …To his credit, however, he … traveled to all the risky spots, listened carefully, assured officials in the field that their concerns are indeed his own.

            [Two investigations] … after the tragic [2003] bombing of the U.N. Baghdad office …. produced little more than politically correct statements. Few low level scapegoats were fired while … [very senior officials] got only a tap on the wrist. None of them accepted responsibility. Some cynics amongst them had their own macabre black jokes about how smart they were to draft their own reprimand letters.

            [Sir David] proved to be of a totally different caliber … [with] dedication to duty and professional pride. It has been many a decade at the U.N. since we have witnessed a senior official take such a bold step. … Well done.”

“The honourable Sir David Veness”, UNforum, at www.unforum.com, 15 July 2008.               

768b.    “As the UN lurches toward a new "Internal Justice System" since it cannot be sued in outside courts,  several inconsistencies have emerged.  At a press conference on Thursday in New York, the five members of the UN's Internal Justice Council acknowledged among other things that the UN's desire for cost-cutting have led it to veer from the recommendations of its own Redesign Panel. …

            Another current process demonstrating UN lawlessness is interviewing of lower level staff by the so-called Accountability Panel that is following up on Lakhdar Brahimi's report on the bombing of UN premises in Algiers in December 2007.  Those being interviewed are denied the right to counsel, or Union representation; the interviews are video taped and, many say, abusive.

            In fact, even a now-outgoing Department of Safety and Security official expresses in private deep concerns about the interrogations.  Inner City Press asked Sinha Basnayake, who sits on both the IJC and the Accountability panel, about the interrogations. He said that the Office of Legal Affairs has said they are okay. To many, that gives little comfort.”

Matthew Russell Lee, “UN Internal Justice Dominated by Management's Lawyers, Whistleblower Restitution Denied”, Inner City Press, July 24, 2008.    [For more on this pattern of UN tragedies and subsequent Secretariat non-responsibility, see item 757a-b above;  Overview Quotes IV item 747, and the IO Watch Archives subsection on Baghdad headquarters bombing.]

769a.    “As the global economy continues to be jolted by volatile financial markets, bank failures, a spreading credit crunch, and rising food and energy prices, some of the developing nations have accumulated three-quarters of the world's reserves, amounting to a staggering 4.3 trillion dollars.              China alone has increased its foreign reserve holdings from 0.1 to 1.7 trillion dollars between 1999 through end of March this year, according to the latest figures released by the United Nations. …

            Some of the countries with the largest sovereign wealth funds [SWFs, defined as "pools of money derived from a country's reserves, which are set aside for investment purposes that will benefit the country's economy and citizens], mostly in oil and energy rich nations, include: the United Arab Emirates (875 billion dollars); …  Singapore (330 billion); Saudi Arabia (300 billion); Kuwait (250 billion); and China (200 billion dollars).

            The reserves and SWFs have one thing in common: they are all state-owned, in contrast to foreign direct investments (FDI), which are both public and private. The SWF assets of developing countries are estimated at around 3.0 trillion dollars.”

Thalif Deen, “Developing Nations Rack up Hefty Foreign Reserves”, Inter Press Service (IPS), July 17, 2008.

769b.    [The world’s individuals and families with a net worth of $10 billion or more, by country:

                        United States --  24

                        Russia  --  18

                        United Kingdom  --  14

                        India  --   8

                        France, Sweden, Germany  --  4 each

                        Others with 2 or 1, including  --  Egypt, Hong Kong, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Mexico,
                        Brazil, and Chile.]

“Where the billionaires are booming”, Newsweek International, July 21, 2008, p. 39.    [Note:  massive reserves and wealth continue their rapid rise in key developing countries.]

770a.    “When the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court sought an arrest warrant this week for the president of Sudan, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, for committing genocide … [many aid workers and diplomats] feared that Bashir would retaliate by attacking peacekeepers and humanitarian workers. …

            But instead of wringing our hands, we should be applauding.  The prosecution for genocide is a historic step that also creates an opportunity in Sudan. … Instead of lashing out … Bashir … may be forced to … become more cooperative. … Now, finally, we have a stick that has [him] alarmed, and that gives us leverage. …

            Throughout most of history, genocide was simply what happened to losers in a conflict, … finally beginning to yield in the last couple of centuries.

            Now this prosecution of a head of state suggests that human standards truly are changing – and that is a prerequisite for ending genocide itself.”

Nicholas D. Kristof, “Stopping genocide”, International Herald Tribune, July 18, 2008.

[Note:  This and the following analyses offer some different perspectives on this important indictment, which seems a critical turning point for UN credibility and the rule of law, as it must somehow balance two “R2P’s” – the established “Responsibility to protect” and now the “Responsibility to prosecute.”  See also items 764 above and  773  following.]

770b.    “The warrant to arrest … Omar Hassan al-Bashir … is a moment of historical reckoning for the leaders and people of the Arab world. … The genocide charge … affirms that there can be no complacency in the face of criminality, and that impunity for killers and brutal dictators in the Third World will not be tolerated.

            But these criminal charges against Arabs in Sudan have to be weighed against three other realities: massive crimes committed against Arabs by their own leaders in other Arab countries; crimes committed by Israel; and the mass suffering, death, destitution, refugee flows, and other consequences of invading foreign forces – especially the American-led troops in Iraq.  Will [they all] … be investigated in due course?

            The moral force and political validity of the rule of law emanate from its universality above all. … We should persist on this road to bring to justice all … who have made the Middle East the world’s sinkhole of political morality and statesmanship.  If the evidence of criminal deeds is available, prosecution in a fair trial should always follow.”

Rami G. Khouri, “Whose crimes against humanity?  Sudan and the ICC”, International Herald Tribune, July 18, 2008.    [Mr. Khouri is editor-at-large of The Daily Star (Lebanon.)]

770c.    “This week’s decision … to seek to indict … Omar al-Bashir … for genocide is the first time [that the International Criminal Court (ICC) has gone after a sitting head of state.  …

            Unlike most of the one-off international tribunals,  such as [those in Sierra Leone and Rwanda, the ICC] is not directly beholden to the UN. … Nevertheless, … [a special charter clause allows] the Security Council … to suspend for a period of 12 months, with indefinite renewal, any investigation or prosecution. …

            [The Court’s] first four cases are all in Africa. … But in the case of Congo, Uganda and the Central African Republic, it was their governments that requested the court to investigate. … As for Sudan, it was the UN Security Council that asked the court to intervene. …

            For a court without any physical means of enforcement, arresting mass criminals is extremely difficult, especially since many signatory states (now up to 107) … are loath to help.  … [But to] build up a deterrent … [and] have credibility … the court must be consistent.  [Chief Prosecutor Luis] Moreno-Ocampo reckons he cannot afford to give in to threats from big shots.”       

“Sudan’s leader is accused, but others can expect to follow”, The Economist, July 10^th, 2008.

770d.    “The bedrock assumption of those committed to the … International Criminal Court is that peace and justice are almost always compatible goals – and that, on the rare occasions when they are not, justice should have priority. …

            Would it be emotionally satisfying to see Bashir in the dock?  Of course it would.  … But the question remains … is the price that the Darfuris almost certainly