A year-long, ambitious effort to overhaul the UN for the 21st century was cut down to size in last-minute negotiations that rescued the blueprint in time for this week's World Summit.
Coming shortly after a damning inquiry into the former UN oil-for-food program for Iraq, the final document presented on Tuesday offered few bold proposals for polishing the world body's image quickly.
Disputed themes such as more credible policing of human rights, improving oversight and accountability at the world body, strong pledges on environmental protection or fighting the threat of nuclear terrorism were watered down in the text.
ILLUSTRATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
Sixty years after the UN was founded at the end of World War II, the aims included adding new members to the Security Council to reflect changed world realities, and shifting power from the one-country, one-vote General Assembly to the UN secretary-general to help fight waste and corruption.
Leaders from more than 170 countries have a much more modest document on the table for their three-day summit which started on Wednesday.
But the US, which has spearheaded the drive for change, called the 35-page text a good start.
"This is not the end of the reform effort," said US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns. "It really is the beginning of a permanent reform effort that must be underway at the United Nations."
"We want the UN to be effective around the world but it has to be more efficient," he told reporters, adding that he hopes the deal would reduce pressure in the US Congress to withhold some UN dues.
A broad range of countries backed setting up a new Human Rights Council as the new UN human rights body, but detailed provisions were blocked by a small number of countries countries that Burns indicated had poor human rights records themselves, though he named no names.
The council is meant to replace the UN Human Rights Commission, widely viewed as discredited because countries with dismal human rights records can sit on it. But leaders are leaving the decision on the overhaul to the General Assembly.
Meanwhile, critics faulted the US for the lack of stronger commitments on fighting hunger and poverty in many parts of the world. Steps meant to tighten the way the UN is run and handles its money were left up to the General Assembly to decide.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who has faced strong US pressure to push ahead with reforms, showed his frustration about a group of about 30 key countries that wrapped up the deal in a crush of late-night sessions over the past two weeks.
"There were spoilers in the group, let's be quite clear about it," he told reporters. "There were governments that were not willing to make concessions."
He did not name any, but pressure groups following the talks have blamed Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Syria, Venezuela and the US, among others, for blocking various points during the discussions.
Nicola Reindorp, spokeswoman for the Oxfam aid group, said negotiators seemed stuck "on the lowest common denominator."
Far from showing nations united, the negotiations showed that every country or bloc of nations found something to object to. Only Monday, nearly every page in the draft document had bracketed paragraphs and highlighted sentences, indicating disagreements.
The text represents a year's worth of work to reaffirm the UN's principles and spell out changes of such arrangements as its outdated preference for World War II's winners and losers. The US, China, Russia, France and Britain have retained vetoes in the all-important Security Council.
But arguments about which countries should sit on an expanded Security Council became so publicly divisive that members have put the matter off for the time being.
British Ambassador Emyr Jones-Parry said he would have liked a stronger reform blueprint.
"But don't expect Rome to be built in a day," he told reporters. "It will take time."
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Following the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia, last month, media outlets circulated familiar narratives about Russia and China’s plans to dethrone the US dollar and build a BRICS-led global order. Each summit brings renewed buzz about a BRICS cross-border payment system designed to replace the SWIFT payment system, allowing members to trade without using US dollars. Articles often highlight the appeal of this concept to BRICS members — bypassing sanctions, reducing US dollar dependence and escaping US influence. They say that, if widely adopted, the US dollar could lose its global currency status. However, none of these articles provide
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
RSS