Greetings from GPF,
As NATO continues its air strikes in Serbia, a number of our new postings this week raise questions about this action. Kofi Annan's press statement on Wednesday and articles on European reactions to the bombings express regret that the UN has not been involved in the decision making. We have also posted a useful "Chronology of the Crisis in Kosovo".
This week on Thursday, the NGO Working Group on the Security Council had a breakfast meeting with Argentina's Ambasssador Petrella -- the morning after the bombing began. That discussion helped to clarify our thinking on some of the UN background to the Kosovo crisis. Firstly, the Security Council has discussed the situation in Kosovo many times over the past year and has adopted two resolutions on the matter -- resolutions that were quite critical of Serbian actions. Secondly, there has been opposition to Council peackeeping action or to authorization of NATO action, mainly by the Russian Federation, but also by China -- opposition that was backed by the treat of the veto. Thirdly, even if a peacekeeping force had been authorized by the Council, it could not have taken up positions on the ground because of opposition from the Serbian government. Forthly, the paralysis of the Security Council is attributable to the veto, which is an institution that MUST be changed if the Council is to become truly effective in future. Fifthly, the widespread opposition among elected Council members to action outside the Council's authority has eroded over the past year as the Kosovo crisis has unfolded, so that now there is considerable resignation to the NATO initiative.
This background does not diminish the tragedy, however. The UN has been sidelined, international law weakened and it remains to be seen whether air strikes will have any effect other than death and destruction and the strengthening of the military mentality and the military budgets. There also is the danger that this use of NATO will reenforce the United States government's position that NATO should broaden its mandate to a wider world policing function.
We will be pursuing these and other questions as we continue to the NGO consultative process with Council members -- in a breakfast meeting with U.S. Ambassador Nancy Soderberg on Monday, March 29th and on the following Monday, April 5 with Counsellor Chenxu of China.
Turning to another vexing question of global policy, 3 of the new articles this week discuss the harm caused by sanctions in Iraq. Particularly disturbing are the 2 reports that women, children and elderly are the worst affected. "Healing the Wounds" also looks at the suffereing of individuals. As many delegations have told us, sanctions against Iraq could be made more humanitarian and far more "targeted" against the leadership. But the United States and the United Kingdom continue to insist that the current broad trade sanctions remain in force.
Following up on UNICEF's State of the World's Children report is Oxfam's report discussed in "Nations Break Promise of School for All Children"
The informal intergovernmental discussions on Financing for Development will continue with the second set of four topics in early April with consideration of: trade and financing for development (5 April); innovative sources of financing (6 April); governance of the international monetary, financial and trade systems (7 April); and interrelationships between major elements and other special topics (8 April). NGO consultations, which were scheduled for this Friday, March 26, were cancelled because of room scheduling problems. A civil society panel will be held next Thursday, which will include two NGO speakers.
The Financing for Development Website at the United Nations has added revisions and includes all statements provided by delegations during the informals, the statements by the Second Committee panelists that preceded the informals, a summary of views presented at an NGO consultation on 15 March. The eight "key element" homepage provides a way for interested parties to exchange ideas and proposals.
"Why is Aid Decreasing?" documents the downward trends in Overseas Development Finance and includes data on specific countries and links to web sites with further resources on countries' development aid.
"UN Pact With Business Masks Real Dangers" is another article responding to the TRAC/ Corporate Watch report on the UNDP's GSDF initiative linked to our site last week.
Other articles this week provide accounts of grassroots organizing occurring in reaction to suffering and problems caused by the Asia and Brazilian financial collapses.
The good news - and most positive development this week is Canada's Parliament's decison on the Tobin Tax. Canada has shown world leadership in adopting a motion calling for an international tax on financial transactions. Final statements of Members of Parliment are included in the text on our site.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
