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."
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken. The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
RSS