Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
What Was New What's New
Week of March 3 - 7, 2008
Iraq Security Council Empire? Social and Economic Policy NGOs Nations and States
Iraq
The Myth of Sectarian Violence in Iraq (January 8, 2008)
The Bush administration uses Iraqi sectarian violence as a way to justify the continued presence of US troops in Iraq. The US government employs a “divide and rule” policy by arming militant death squads to suppress Sunni resistance and assigning seats in the Iraqi Governing Council based on sectarian divisions. Before the US occupation of Iraq, however, Sunnis and Shias lived, worked, married and even attended religious services amongst one another. “In September of 2007, 500 British troops left Basra and ceased to conduct regular foot patrols; the overall level of violence has decreased 90 percent since then,” suggesting the main source of violence in Iraq is the occupying forces, not sectarian conflict. (International Socialist Review)White House Blocks Inquiry into Construction of $736M Embassy in Iraq (February 29, 2008)
According to this Guardian article, the Bush administration continues to block inquiries into the construction of the world’s largest US embassy in Baghdad, previously scheduled for completion in mid-2007. Despite verifying the building as “substantially complete,” the Oversight Committee in the House of Representatives found that the embassy suffers from basic flaws in its water, kitchen and fire alarm systems. Furthermore, two US State Department employees involved in the US embassy assignment are now under investigation for criminal conduct.Thousands of New Prisoners Overwhelm Iraqi Prison System (February 14, 2008)
According to this New York Times article, the number of detainees in Iraq has increased with the rising number of US troops, straining the already over-crowded Iraqi prison system. At the Rusafa detention center alone, “6,647 detainees had been captured since the American force was increased and 6,079 of them had not been found guilty of any crime,” leading to human rights violations. Furthermore, the US Justice Department-established program, the Iraq Corrections Program, instigates sectarian violence by specifically appointing Shiite guards to watch over Sunni prisoners.Congress Ramps Up Fight Against Permanent Iraq Bases (February 22, 2008)
Congress wants an absolute guarantee that US “permanent military bases are not being planned or constructed in Iraq.” The signing of the Declaration of Principles by President Bush and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, however, proves that the US intends to secure economic and military benefits through a continuing presence in Iraq. Congressman Bill Delahunt questioned the validity of the Declaration of Principles in a series of hearings and remains skeptical of the document’s constitutional validity, since it bypassed legislative approval. (TruthOut)Security Council
To Blame the Victims for this Killing Spree Defies Both Morality and Sense (March 5, 2008)
This article by Seumas Milne argues that it is unjust for Israel to invoke self-defense to use force in Gaza – a blockaded territory under Israeli practical and legal occupation. The article notes that the weight of casualties lie on the Palestinian side by forty to one, with over a fifth of those killed being children. Milne suggests that Israel should take up Hamas’ offer of a truce; a solution which is supported by 64% of Israelis, but rejected by Washington. (Guardian)Security Council Mulls Condemnation of Israeli Assault on Gaza (March 2, 2008)
This Daily News Egypt source reports that a resolution condemning the killing of civilians in Gaza by Israeli forces was blocked in the Security Council by the US, threatening to use its veto. The draft resolution, circulated by Libya, urged Israel to abide by international law following the killing of 61 Palestinians in the occupied territory by Israeli forces. The Palestinian representative to the UN, Ryad Mansour, claimed that the assault constituted a “collective punishment” of the people in Gaza. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon criticized Israel for “the disproportionate and excessive use of force that has killed so many civilians, including children,” while also condemning the rocket attacks by the Palestinians.Letter from NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer to the Security Council on Afghanistan (February 4, 2008)
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer paints a depressing picture of the security situation in Afghanistan in this report to the Security Council. Some six years after the UN mandated a NATO force (ISAF), the report notes that the Afghan Army and Police forces are inadequately trained and that there exists a vacuum in the rule of law in the country. Scheffer also states that much of Afghanistan remains in the hands of opposition forces, and that attacks against civilians and military personnel in the country have increased.Security Council Resolution 1803 on Iran (March 3, 2008)
This Security Council resolution extends sanctions against Iran. It notes that the Iranian government attempts to enrich uranium – potentially a key component in the development of nuclear weapons. The text restricts the import of “dual use” technology used for both peaceful and military purposes, and asks UN member states to inspect cargos suspected of transporting nuclear material to and from Iran. The resolution also adds 13 names to an existing travel ban and asset freeze on companies and individuals thought to be engaged in Iran’s nuclear program.Empire?
Pushback to Unilateralism: the China-India-Russia Alliance (January 3, 2008)
Traditional power-balancing is passé, suggests this Foreign Policy in Focus article. China, India and Russia advocate a “multipolar-multilateral” alternative in the form of a new US-free collective security regime. The lynchpin of this alliance is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), led by China and Russia, which has developed a policy for post-Taliban Afghanistan to push NATO out. Kabul has been so receptive to the SCO that it sold Beijing the largest mining deal in Afghan history. In spite of the group’s security agenda, it poses no threat to US military strategy. Rather, this collaboration secures lucrative investment deals: a challenge to US economic interests.Good Muslim, Bad Muslim – An African Perspective (April, 2007)
This essay explores the link between Islam and Terrorism. Too often, the media fails to delineate political behavior from religious behavior, presenting terrorism as “a cultural residue in modern politics.” The author, Mahmood Mamdani, argues it is a mistake to blame religion for political problems since movements like Al’Qaeda are outcomes of contemporary social relations. The US remains culpable for these troubled relations by funding and then condemning militant groups such as the Afghan Mujahideen. Mamdani shows that chilling history makes chilling politics. (Social Science Research Council)Campaign 2000: Promoting the National Interest (January/ February 2000)
This Foreign Affairs paper sets forth a Republican ideology of US national interests. From the premise that US values are universal, Condoleezza Rice deduces that the spread of freedom, peace and prosperity are by-products of the pursuit of US interests. Thus, she resorts to traditional imperial claims, that unilateralism is legitimate and humanitarian intervention valuable only when national interest is at stake: “There is nothing wrong with doing something that benefits humanity, but that is, in a sense, a second-order effect.”Social and Economic Policy
Are We Approaching a Global Food Crisis? (March 3, 2008)
Global Policy Forum’s Katarina Wahlberg warns that for the “first time in decades, worldwide scarcity of food is becoming a problem.” Increasing demand of cereals for food consumption, cattle feeding and in particular biofuel production, is driving food prices to record levels. Especially the poor, who spend a majority of their income on food, will suffer. To make matters worse, the food price hike is also affecting the amount of food aid available, as governments have not increased funding for the UN’s World Food Programme. (World Economy & Development in Brief)
This Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) brief analyses how bio- or agrofuel production infringes on The Right to Food. This human right obligates all signatories to implement a “twin-track approach to food security.” Firstly, states must enable every person to feed him-or herself with dignity. Secondly, states must provide safety nets in cases where no other remedy against hunger exists. According to the FAO, countries set well-intended targets for agrofuel production but neglect the negative impact of these targets on food security.Faults in the Vault: Not Everyone is Celebrating Svalbard (February 2008)
According to GRAIN, the Global Seed Vault is not the “ultimate safety net” for biodiversity. Instead, it is part of a wider strategy making “off site storage” the single approach to preserving biodiversity. The Vault takes plant varieties away from their farmers and communities of origin and subsequently denies them access to the stored seeds. The Standard Depositor Agreement for the Vault gives right of use to a select few. GRAIN argues that farmers should control biodiversity – not the corporations that have destroyed it.Priced Out of the Market (March 3, 2008)
This New York Times editorial discusses the human cost of the “rich world’s subsidized appetite for biofuels.” When it seemed that global food supply might run out in the past, food production grew to meet demand. This time it might not be so easy, with the demand for biofuels diverting food into energy for cars, rather than human beings. (New York Times)Gender Equity Index 2008 (February 28, 2008)
Social Watch published the Gender Equity Index 2008 to contribute to the 52nd Session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women. The index ranks 157 countries on a scale where a score of 100 implies total equality between women and men in education, economic activity and participation in decision-making processes. The highest score totals 89 (Sweden) and the world average is a mere 61. The top-five countries are Sweden, Finland (85), Norway (84), Germany (80) and Rwanda (80) – one of the poorest countries in the world. This shows that high per capita income does not guarantee gender equity. Social Watch concludes that “progress towards gender equity is difficult and vulnerable to regressions.”When He Eats Little, She Eats Less (September 24, 2004)
In this Guardian article, economist Noreena Hertz shows how IMF and World Bank policies disproportionately hurt women. These institutions impose stringent loan conditions such as privatization and limited public expenditure. Hertz points out how falling public investments in water and sanitation force women to walk long distances for water and risk their personal safety. Also, in order to repay their vast debts, poor countries export cash crops, leading to scarcity of essential foodstuffs domestically. Women then sacrifice their own food intake in order to feed their families. According to Hertz, “debt is a feminist issue.”NGOs
The Power Shift and the NGO Credibility Crisis (January 2006)
Over the past half century, NGOs have increased four-fold and become astute at mobilizing support. In the midst of transnational threats, like global warming, and a wave of democratization, international and domestic institutions rely critically on NGO input. Yet there is a dearth of mechanisms to scrutinize NGOs themselves. This paper argues for a set of “industry-wide standards” to enhance NGO credibility. (International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law)NGOs and Partnership (April 2001)
This policy brief argues that Northern NGOs must stop imposing their agendas on Southern Partners. In theory, North-South NGO partnerships benefit NGOs both in rich and poor countries. The Northern NGO, close to the donor public, attracts funding; while the Southern NGO implements initiatives in the field. This study of ten European NGOs reveals that the funding process skews the power structure in favor of Northern NGOs, which can “hijack the accountability mechanisms” by distancing Southern NGOs from grassroots needs. Few NGO staff in the study found examples of mutual, shared decision making. (International NGO Training and Research Centre)Haiti's Catch-22 (February 27, 2008)
NGOs and foreign charities provide 85 percent of services in Haiti. No wonder, argues political activist Patrick Elie in Dominion, that NGOs “slowly remove all the flesh from the state.” In a country brutalized by successive coups and grinding poverty, foreign aid institutions control the machinery that should be in the hands of the state. Elie concludes a “plague of NGOs” has eroded Haitian sovereignty.Nations and States
To Relocate or Not to Relocate? (March 3, 2008)
Climate change has caused extreme drought in Swaziland, a microstate in Southern Africa. In some regions, farming is no longer possible and several communities can not support themselves. The government owns unused farms in viable parts of the country but wants to incorporate them into large-scale agricultural projects instead of making them available to small farmers. Poor families can not afford to move to better areas. Agriculture officials and NGOs raise the question whether the affected Swazis should be relocated to other regions. (Inter Press Service)Europe vs the Super-Rich (March 4, 2008)
The European Union wants to tackle tax havens by strengthening the 2005 “savings tax directive.” Skeptics say closing down these tax havens will not stop tax evaders from placing their money outside of Europe. Some estimate that tax havens around the world hold between $7 and $12 trillion. If this money was taxed, it would yield enough revenue to pay for “many of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals,” the author states. Tax havens are the ideal means for criminals to launder money obtained by illegal practices such as drug trade and terrorism. (Independent)Index of State Weakness in the Developing World (February 2008)
The Brookings Institution’s Index of State Weakness ranks 141 developing countries on the basis of four critical state abilities: economic growth, political institutions, security and social welfare. According to their score, the countries are divided into groups from “failed states,” “critically weak states,” “weak states” to “states to watch.” The report illustrates several trends such as extreme insecurity in failed states and the link between extreme poverty and weak states.Under Pressure: States in the Global Era (September 2007)
In this report, Laura Tedesco, Associate Fellow at FRIDE, Peace, Security and Human Rights programme, points out that state formation is a long and dynamic process influenced by many national and international factors. States are constantly evolving and since the Cold War, globalization has accelerated the process of change. “Fragile states” often have difficulties adapting to the new global order and have come to rely on international aid. But the report warns that international donors should be careful not to undermine domestic policies by imposing a Western conception of the state.
