|
||||||||||||
Greetings from GPF!
This week, we have seen some movement on the issue of sanctions against Libya. But while a number of non-aligned members of the Security Council are calling for the formal lifting of the sanctions, the US has made it clear that it opposes any such move. In a recent CNN Online article, acting US Ambassador to the UN, Peter Burleigh, said that "at a time like this we think it's premature to talk about [lifting the sanctions]." By refusing to discuss the possibility of lifting the sanctions, the US finds itself more and more isolated, as even the UK has resumed diplomatic relations with the Libyan government after a 15 year break.
The three African states currently on the Security Council - Gabon, Gambia and Namibia - strongly advocate the lifting of the sanctions, which were suspended after Libya handed over two suspects accused of responsibility the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. Namibian Ambassador Martin Andjaba submitted a resolution to lift the sanctions to the Security Council on Wednesday, July 7, but the US has vowed to veto any such initiative.
In a report submitted to the Council this week, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan cited statements made by France and Britain expressing overall satisfaction with Libya's compliance in both the Lockerbie trail and France's trial in absentia last March of six Libyans for the 1989 bombing of UTA flight 772. Annan's report also includes statements made by Tunisia, Uganda, South Africa and Qatar, urging the Security Council to pass a resolution to formally lift the sanctions.
Elsewhere in Africa, after nearly nine years of civil war, the government of Sierra Leone and rebels of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) have signed a peace agreement under which the two sides will share power. The agreement, which was reached in Lome, Togo, allocates four cabinet ministers' posts and four deputies to the RUF. While the international community has welcomed the agreement, doubts have been raised about the amnesty granted to the rebels who have waged a campaign of terror against civilians in Sierra Leone. Human Rights Watch has called on the UN to reject a general amnesty, saying that "the atrocities committed in Sierra Leone have shocked the world…[and] the United Nations must not sponsor a peace agreement that pretends they never happened."
In the wake of the Kosovo Crisis, the world press continues to comment critically on United States global policy and its negative role at the United Nations. This week, we were particularly interested to read an opinion piece of this kind coming from a mainstream US journalist. In an article published last week in the International Herald Tribune, longtime New York Times editorial writer Flora Lewis warned that in many countries around the world, "people are getting worried that there is nothing to restrain or balance U.S. power." She favorably quoted the Paris-based magazine Le Nouvel Observateur that U.S. leaders "show an impenetrable provincialism, even an obscene incompetence." Lewis went on to urge a strengthened UN, urging that "the United States must learn to be a special power, constrained by its own might to feel and observe community." We may be skeptical about Lewis' concept of a misguided but essentially benevolent superpower, but we are glad to see US journalists consider unrestrained US hegemony as a dubious way to run the world.
The UN Security Council remains the principal alternative to US unilateralism in global security policy. So we were interested to attend one of its rare open meetings on Thursday morning, July 8, to hear delegates discuss post-conflict peacebuilding, including disarmament and demobilization of forces. Though the discussion was general, the main case in everyone's mind was clearly Kosovo, where NATO has failed to disarm and demobilize the KLA. Behind the seemingly bland official statements, there were some sharp barbs -- Russia's Sergey Lavrov rapped NATO's policy in Kosovo, while the UK's Jeremy Greenstock took a dig at the United States by calling for more "adequate resources" for the UN and its peacekeeping operations.
The many NGOs, Secretariat staff and others in the public gallery sometimes had a hard time following the debate, however. Each gallery seat is equipped with an earpiece for simultaneous translations, but the UN financial crisis has eroded the repairs budget and now most of the earpieces no longer work. Some of us managed to listen to earpieces connected to the adjacent press gallery seats, while others sat by uncomprehendingly, as delegates made speeches in languages such as Russian, Arabic and Chinese that few could understand.
On Monday, July 5, while New York steamed in record heat and the UN was closed for the long Fourth of July Weekend, Secretary General Kofi Annan held a special meeting in Paris with the International Chamber of Commerce, the global business lobby, continuing a dialogue begun in February 1998. The International Organization of Employers also participated in the session. The SG and his business counterparts ended their session by issuing a policy statement, affirming the importance of Annan's call for a Global Compact between the UN and the private sector. The joint statement, among other things, affirmed as "indispensable" the corporations' capability to "create wealth" and to "meet their responsibilities" to their shareholders.
At GPF, though we aren't working on "wealth creation," we like to keep our eye on economic indicators, especially those that relate to the UN's financial health. Summer associates Ben Holt and Christian Kaufholz have produced nine excellent new graphs for our web site, illustrating aspects of United Nations finance and peacekeeping. We strongly commend these graphs and hope you will find them useful.
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.