| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:27 pm Post subject: Ban Ki-Moon and the UN |
 |
|
A disastrous failure of leadership
| Quote: |
The United Nations appears to be spinning, once more, into crisis. Inga-Britt Ahlenius, the outgoing head of the UN's internal corruption watchdog, has delivered a scathing "end of assignment" report in which she accuses the Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, of personally frustrating her work.
The allegations in the leaked paper certainly seem to fit a depressing pattern. Some of the UN's top internal investigators have departed in recent years and have not been replaced. And the watchdog's investigative unit has been instructed not to open cases of financial fraud or corruption involving former UN staff. This is the sort of behaviour one would expect from a nervous tin-pot dictatorship, not the world's foremost multilateral organisation. And, according to Ms Ahlenius, the rot comes from the very top.
Mr Ban was chosen as Secretary General three years ago in the wake of the Iraq oil-for-food corruption scandal, which tarnished the reputation of his predecessor, Kofi Annan. This unprepossessing Korean diplomat was charged with cleaning up the UN's image and pushing forward internal reform. But it would appear that Mr Ban's primary objective has been to avoid rocking the boat.
In any discussion of the shortcomings of the UN, it is vital to recognise that the organisation will always be a flawed organisation so long as the countries that make up its membership are flawed. To some of its critics, the UN is too exclusive, too slanted in favour of the richer nations. It is regularly attacked, in particular, for the unrepresentative nature of the governing Security Council. And yet when certain unsavoury regimes take up places on UN human rights panels, the organisation finds itself criticised for not being exclusive enough.
Something similar applies when the UN brokers deals. Horse trading is needed to get anything substantive done, whether that is delivering aid to closed states hit by natural disasters (like Burma in the wake of Cyclone Nargis), or getting approval for multilateral peacekeeping missions (as in Darfur). Yet it finds itself condemned for doing shady deals. The UN's curse is to be held to higher moral standards than its member states, while still expected to deliver results through consensus.
The UN also has powerful and vociferous enemies, not least in the United States, who seize upon its every failing. The real agenda of many of these critics is not to reform the institution, but to destroy it. It is vital that they do not succeed. The United Nations is, on balance, a positive force in the world. The G20 and the G8 are groupings of the powerful. The UN is the only forum in which the poor states of the planet have any sort of global voice.
But however many compromises the UN makes to keep the show on the road, one thing on which it simply cannot afford to compromise is institutional corruption. Corruption undermines the legitimacy that the UN draws from its inclusive approach. Everything worthwhile that the UN does � from impartial inquiries into the behaviour of nation states, to peacekeeping missions, to co-ordinating international efforts to counter climate change � depends on this legitimacy. That is why the oil-for-food scandal was so damaging. The UN must be seen as competent to police itself.
Whatever else Mr Ban's supporters claim he has delivered, on issues from women's rights to international diplomacy, when it comes to institutional reform and the fight against corruption he has been disastrously weak. The Secretary General's first term will come to an end at the end of next year. There needs to be nothing short of a revolution in Mr Ban's approach if he is to merit another.
|
Hehe - why would you send someone from a country so blighted by corruption as Korea, to clean up an institution... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They probably believed that he had the most experience dealing with it from the inside that he would be the perfect weapon to fight it. Kind of like a flu shot.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:04 am Post subject: Re: Ban Ki-Moon and the UN |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Mr Ban's primary objective has been to avoid rocking the boat.......... |
How Korean.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:12 am Post subject: Re: Ban Ki-Moon and the UN |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Mr Ban's primary objective has been to avoid rocking the boat.......... |
How Korean. |
How UN |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blockhead confidence
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:42 am Post subject: Re: Ban Ki-Moon and the UN |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Hehe - why would you send someone from a country so blighted by corruption as Korea, to clean up an institution... |
Considering there's a pretty strong correlation between how poor a country is (or in Korea's case, how recently poor) and the level of corruption, I wholeheartedly agree with Big Bird that UN leaders should only be from rich white nations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoholDiver
Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
UN Leaders seem to be taken from developing or undeveloped nations on purpose, since the weaker/poorer countries claim they have no voice.
It is hard to find any agent who has been in that sort of organization for 20 or so years and does not have a scandal to his/her name. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Louis VI
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Location: In my Kingdom
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cunning! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Considering Korea actually looks like what it does now instead of stagnating like it's 1969, corruption isn't that bad here compared to other places.
Anyways even if Ban actually tried cleaning up the UN, he would have made a lot of enemies either way and wouldn't be chosen for another term anyways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:54 pm Post subject: Re: Ban Ki-Moon and the UN |
|
|
| djsmnc wrote: |
| nautilus wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Mr Ban's primary objective has been to avoid rocking the boat.......... |
How Korean. |
How UN |
He is not acting like previous UN Secretary Generals from what I can see. Yes, they are all afraid of rocking the boat to some extent. He also seems secetive. He also engages in angry outbursts. That's not the way to behave as head of the UN. To be honest, I thought of horrible Korean bosses. I admire him for his ability to speak French, English, and Korean and his hard work ethic, but I prefer Kofe Anan much more. I wouldn't like to think of that.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_un_criticism
It seems he is accused of being incompetent. I didn't hear of any secretary general attack so much internally. I am referring to the last three at least.
Boutros Boutros Ghali, De Cuellar, and Kofe Anan didn't get attack so much internally. They weren't disliked like that internally. I don't like Ban Ki Moon. He isn't equipped to do the job. However, Ahlenius seemed to behave in an impetuous fashion, like an angry child when Ban didn't do things her way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shinramyun
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
People need to realize that the UN is basically irrelevant. Just look at what happened to North Korea issue. Ban was put in there because:
1. he is not anti american, anti russian or anti chinese.
2. he is a bureaucrat who isn't going to make waves.
3. big players like china and russia wants the UN quiet and doing nothing to obstruct them.
Ban will be re-elected because he will once again have the backings of the big players who are happy that he stays out of their ways.
Anyway, Putin and Ban are friends. And you know Russia has many strings in UN as much as US or china.
People who say he sucks because he is a korean are bigger idiots than i thought.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shinramyun wrote: |
People who say he sucks because he is a korean |
I think he 'sucks' but not because he is Korean. I think he is a bloody useless bugger - but as you yourself have pointed out, the big players may well prefer someone ineffectual. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The United Nations is a joke.
You can point the finger at Ban Ki Moon, but the fact of the matter is, its been a joke for a long time. The UN is a great organization for their humanitarian and charity efforts. Outside of that, they are a completely incompetent.
Personally, I think Ban Ki Moon is doing a better job than that criminal Khofi Anan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
The United Nations is a joke.
|
And will remain so as this is what suits the status quo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Personally, I think Ban Ki Moon is doing a better job than that criminal Khofi Anan. |
I like the fact that he has different first and middle names. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Personally, I think Ban Ki Moon is doing a better job than that criminal Khofi Anan. |
I like the fact that he has different first and middle names. |
A friend of mine used to refer to Anan as: General Secretary Coffee Anyone? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
