Cebo.org is a collegial approach to information sharing between ethics-based
organizations with NGO status at the United Nations. Please contact member parties regarding the
positions of their respective organizations on matters expressed in this online journal.
November 27, 2005
Posted 7:43 PM
by Mary
Britain has angered John Bolton, America's combative ambassador to the United Nations, by breaking ranks with him over the need for reform. The rare public disagreement between the two close allies comes as the showdown over reforms at the UN's New York headquarters becomes increasingly acrimonious. Britain has rebuffed a Bolton move to join him in refusing to pass the organisation's 2006 budget until member states approve wide-ranging management reforms. To the irritation of Mr Bolton, many developing nations are bitterly opposed to changes that they claim are driven by American political pressure. He suggested last week that talks on the 2006 and 2007 budgets could be postponed as a means to overcome the trenchant resistance from the "G77" bloc of developing countries. He also threatened that the United States could seek an alternative to the UN for solving international problems in future. Britain strongly supports the reform package, but along with the other 24 EU states it has ruled out a budget delay. "We are not in favour of holding any individual items or the budget hostage to other issues but we do say very clearly that by the end of this year we need clarity and a determination to tackle a better management for the United Nations," said the British ambassador Emyr Jones Parry. Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, said that any delay in approving next year's budget would create a "serious financial crisis". Mr Bolton says a temporary budget could be passed to ensure UN operations did not grind to a halt. The reform proposals are intended to improve the efficiency and running of the UN bureaucracy by handing the secretary general's office greater power to oversee management, finance and staffing. These responsibilities are currently the remit of the unwieldly 191-state General Assembly, where developing nations fear losing their influence. The changes - agreed at the UN World Summit in September following a damning report into the oil-for-food scandal - are already a watered-down version of what America and the EU had hoped for. The stand-off is also frustrating Mr Annan, who is desperate to introduce reforms before he leaves office next year in an attempt to improve a reputation badly tarnished by the scandal. "We have to get past this political dogfight. We just hope that both sides can sober up and reach some agreement on this," Mark Malloch Brown, Mr Annan's British chief of staff, told the Sunday Telegraph. "The UN needs a first-class international public administration capable of meeting its challenges and we don't have that right now." Western diplomats hope that there may be progress before the end of the year on limited changes such as new ethics committee and overhauling the discredited human rights commission. But they are braced for "trench warfare" on management reforms. "The hostility and conflict in the debate about reforms illustrate the many fault lines in the organisation," said a senior Western envoy. "It is going to be a long hard slog." Mr Bolton, a long-time and vocal UN critic, arrived in New York four months ago with a reputation as an uncompromising tough talker. Privately, British diplomats express surprise that he has not made greater efforts to cultivate them or build alliances. "You're either with him or against him," said one.
November 18, 2005
Posted 1:11 PM
by Mary
UN rejects Guantanamo visit offer The UN has formally rejected a US invitation to visit the Guantanamo prison camp, saying it cannot accept the restrictions imposed by Washington. UN human rights experts said the US had refused to grant them the right to speak to detainees in private. UN senior official Manfred Nowak said private interviews were a "totally non-negotiable pre-condition" for conducting the visit. Some 500 terror suspects are being held at the US military camp. Mr Nowak, the UN's special rapporteur on torture, told the BBC his team would accept nothing less than unfettered access. In front of prison guards they would never tell you the truth because of being afraid of reprisal Manfred Nowak, UN special rapporteur "If you want to hear from a detainee or know from a detainee whether he or she has been subjected to torture or ill treatment then you must be allowed to speak to this person in private," he said. "In front of prison guards they would never tell you the truth because of being afraid of reprisal. "There are certain conditions which we feel are non-negotiable and unannounced visit to places of detention and private interviews with detainees is one of those totally non-negotiable pre-conditions." Only the International Committee of the Red Cross has been given access to the prisoners. It reports its findings only to the detaining authorities. Pentagon refusal Human rights campaigners have expressed growing concern about the treatment of the inmates at Guantanamo, a number of whom are on hunger strike. Calls for it to be opened to human rights monitors increased this year, as more allegations surfaced of abuse at the prison camp. UN officials have been trying to visit the camp since it opened in January 2002. Last month, the Pentagon said the UN monitors would be allowed to visit the camp on 6 December. Pentagon spokesman Lieut Col Brian Maker told the BBC the invitation to the UN team was intended to allay fears that detainees were being mistreated. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/
November 17, 2005
Posted 8:55 PM
by Mary
United Nations Secretary-General’s Study on Violence Against Children 17 November 2005 Summary The DPI/NGO Section held its regular weekly NGO briefing today on the Secretary-General’s Study on Violence Against Children, which focuses on raising awareness on violence against children in five settings (home and family, schools and educational settings, other institutional settings, the community and on the streets, and in work situations). The final report will be presented to the General Assembly next year by the Independent Expert, Professor Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, who was appointed by the Secretary-General in 2003. Joan Kirby, Chair, NGO/DPI Executive Committee, shared information about upcoming events including the Town Hall Meeting and Communication Workshop. H.E. Roman Kirn, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Slovenia to the United Nations; Amaya Gillespie, Director, Secretariat, United Nations Secretary-General’s Study on Violence Against Children; and Mali Nilsson, Member, the International Save the Children Task Group on Violence Against Children, spoke about key elements of the Study. Amaya Gillespie outlined the strategy of the Study, which would include more than 250 public submissions and research based on over 2000 existing reports. Expanding partnerships and networking made a Study of this calibre possible. An impressive amount of government responses to questionnaires, 125 to date, showed the interest and willingness of governments to address the issue. Child participation has been an integral part of the Study. Over 250 children participated in National Consultations, which led to the larger Regional Consultations. The participation of children was so important because of the perspectives they offered. Children were more willing to talk about unspeakable things and could offer suggestions of what they would like to see happen. Lastly, expert thematic meetings played an important role by focusing on cross-cutting issues, such as gender based issues, sexual violence, and children with disabilities. Dr. Gillespie then discussed the nine Regional Consultations, which proved that despite economic disparities, every nation had something to learn from another about violence against children. The Consultations resulted in outcome reports, declarations, recommendations, and plans for follow-up. To conclude the Study, there would be three publications to be presented in 2006. The first would be a 30 page final report to the Secretary-General and the General Assembly, the second a more elaborate publication with in depth information and recommendations, and the third a child-friendly version of the report. H.E. Roman Kirn affirmed that Slovenia felt strongly about this issue and without hesitation supported and contributed to the Study. Slovenia was the host of the Regional Consultations for Europe and Central Asia. This was one of the largest Consultations with participation from 51 countries. Held in July, the Consultations had three goals, to provide input, mobilize political commitment, and set an agenda for action. Child participation was very visible, integrated, and valuable. Ambassador Kirn said there were nine final conclusions resulting from this meeting. They were to create an action plan to prevent violence, ratify relevant treaties, give high political importance to prevention, evaluate reporting mechanisms, collect systematic data, create appropriate interventions, create education programmes about violence, strengthen partnerships and create opportunities for children to be more involved. In conclusion, Ambassador Kirn stated six important features of the Regional Consultations. Because of the Consultations, there was high political support for the issue, which was needed to generate the effects that the Study hoped to have. He reiterated that the meetings would not have been so successful without the participation of children. The media, domestic and foreign, played an important role by supporting the cause and raising public awareness. The Regional Consultations brought countries together to share experiences that would contribute to useful findings both on regional and global levels. A human rights framework was used to address child human rights. Lastly, partnerships proved to be valuable and efficient. Mali Nilsson spoke about the importance of the Study to her organization, Save the Children, a member of the NGO Advisory Panel for the Study. According to Ms. Nilsson, the Study was a priority because it was her organization’s duty to protect children from violence. Save the Children also saw the Study as an opportunity to challenge and change current attitudes about violence against children. Save the Children believed in the right of every boy and girl to live free of violence. Their aim was to have all parts of society recognize and take action to eliminate all forms of violence. Ms. Nilsson reiterated the importance of perspectives brought by child participation, and also that their participation could have positive effects on the children, such as healing their pasts and enhancing self-esteem and confidence. To conclude, Ms. Nilsson listed some of the achievements and contributions of Save the Children, such as production of advocacy materials, child-friendly publications, facilitating workshops on child participation and the inclusion of children in formulating outcome documents.
November 10, 2005
Posted 8:19 PM
by Mary
DPI/NGO Briefing Women, Peace and Security: Participation, Protection and Prevention 10 November 2005 Summary DPI/NGO Section held its regular weekly NGO briefing today focusing on the role of women in peace and security, and advancements in gender-based perspectives since the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1325. Joan Kirby, Chair, NGO Executive Committee shared information on upcoming events of interest to NGOs. A video entitled Women: Peace and Security (DPI, 7 March 2001) was screened before the panel discussion. H.E. Sir Emyr Jones Parry, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the United Nations; Rachel Mayanja, Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Gender Issues and the Advancement of Women; and Parvina Nadjibulla, NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security, spoke about progress that has been made in the area of women, peace and security since the adoption of Resolution 1325 and the important steps that must follow to ensure the successful implementation of the resolution. Rachel Mayanja emphasized the importance of Resolution 1325, which stresses the importance of the involvement of women in all aspects of the peace process, and spoke about the importance of the 27 October open meetings of the Security Council that commemorated the fifth anniversary of the adoption of the resolution. She highlighted the meetings as an opportune time to evaluate the progress that had been made in regards to the resolution and stressed that there is still much more that needs to be done. As a result of Resolution 1325, the Security Council tasked the Secretary-General to prepare an action plan, which identifies gaps and challenges in the implementation of the resolution as well as recommendations for further action that the Security Council and other actors may wish to consider. Ms. Mayanja called for a broader implementation of the resolution in the future. She stated that there are still a number of gaps that need to be filled with action. Ms. Mayanja suggested that more women be placed in senior positions within the UN Secretariat and that women head a greater number of UN missions. H.E. Sir Emyr Jones Parry affirmed that the United Kingdom was a driving force behind the adoption of Resolution 1325 and will remain vocal in the implementation of the resolution. He stated that it was crucial to raise awareness of the role of women in peace and security, both as victims of violence and contributors to peace processes. His Excellency spoke about the national action plan being implemented by the Government of the United Kingdom. The action plan of the United Kingdom strives for all departments of Government to adopt the principles set forth in Resolution 1325 and maps out a plan of concrete actions that must be taken to raise awareness of women and ensure its successful implementation. The Ambassador noted a few key points highlighted in the United Kingdom’s national action plan including the appointment of more women to senior positions in the domestic and international spheres and the inclusion of a gender-perspective into all field operations. Sir Emyr Jones Parry concluded his presentation by posing the question of whether there be a follow-up Security Council Resolution to Resolution 1325. This was necessary if it could be proven that the new resolution, tailored at the implementation of Resolution 1325, would have a greater global effect. Concerning this matter, Sir Emyr Jones Parry stated that it was a question worth examining during his Government’s Presidency of the Security Council next month. Parvina Nadjibulla began her presentation by explaining the work of the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security, which strives to call attention to the issue of women, peace and security and demonstrate the disproportionate impact on women in conflict situations and a disproportionate number of women involved in peace processes. Since the adoption of the resolution, the Working Group has focused efforts on using Resolution 1325 as a means to raise awareness and promote advocacy at the national level. Ms. Nadjibulla revealed that Resolution 1325 has yielded mixed results and she called for greater review and monitoring of the Secretary-General’s system-wide action plan. Ms. Nadjibulla presented information from the Working Group’s most recent report, From Local to Global: Making Peace Work for Women, which emphasizes the actions taken by the UN to promote the resolution, outlines national action plans that have been devised and offers recommendations for the future. Ms. Nadjibulla also called for additional Security Council resolutions to ensure the successful implementation of the resolution. The panel discussion was followed by a question-and-answer session. In response to a question about how to handle perpetrators of violence against women, Ms. Mayanja stressed the need for women to work closely with men and enlist them as advocates. She called for the cessation of impunity for perpetrators and reform of national laws that often protect perpetrators. A question was raised regarding UN responses to accusations of peacekeepers taking advantage of forced prostitution in conflict areas. Ms. Mayanja stated that although this used to be an unspoken issue at the UN, much has changed. She pointed out the instructions from the Secretary-General forbidding UN peacekeepers from fraternizing with community members and stressed that such an order must be reinforced by the command structure within each mission. Sir Emyr Jones Parry responded by citing the example that British forces in Afghanistan are not allowed out of the barracks at night unless on patrol. This severely limits interaction and fraternization between troops and civilians. The Ambassador stressed that policies such as this one needed to be implemented and enforced and that unacceptable behaviour needed to be disciplined. Following the question-and-answer session, Henk-Jan Brinkman, Senior Economic Affairs Officer, Executive Office of the Secretary-General, gave an ad hoc briefing about Phase II of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), which will be held in Tunis from 16 to 18 November 2005. Mr. Brinkman explained that at the conclusion of Phase I of WSIS (10 to 12 December 2003, Geneva), there were three main issues left unresolved: Internet governance, financing modalities and follow-up implementation. Mr. Brinkman focused his presentation on the most controversial and complicated issue, Internet governance. During the question-and-answer period that followed, most of the questions touched upon media criticism over Internet governance. Mr. Brinkman emphasized that despite claims by some groups, the UN had no intentions of taking over the Internet.
November 7, 2005
Posted 10:11 PM
by Mary
On Friday, 28 October 2005, in a historic ceremony held at the United Nations Headquarters, Mexico deposited its instrument of ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, becoming the 100th State Party to the ICC! Today’s landmark 100th ratification is seen by NGOs around the world as a testament to the remarkable strides made by the ICC and its supporters in its short history to date. As the 100th country to ratify the ICC treaty, Mexico has joined with the majority of the world in showing its support for an end to impunity. Almost every country in the European Union, twenty-seven African countries, and all but four Latin American countries have now joined the new system of international justice. Congratulations to Mexico and all States Parties to the ICC! The CICC Press Release is available at http://www.iccnow.org/
November 5, 2005
Posted 2:10 PM
by Mary
The International Criminal Court Divides the Americas By Lamia Oualalou Le Figaro Friday 04 November 2005 The International Criminal Court divides the Americas. Mexico is the 100th country to sign the Treaty of Rome, which consecrates the International Criminal Court's creation. To Washington's great displeasure. Mexico has once again proved wrong its reputation as a country in the shadow of the United States. By announcing last Friday that it was becoming the hundredth country to ratify the article of the statute of Rome consecrating the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Mexico has given itself a symbol. It has also reiterated its refusal to sign any kind of immunity agreement with the United States. A slap in the face for the big neighbor. For the Bush administration over the last few years has not stinted in its efforts to abort the ICC, this tool the international community has equipped itself with to sanction the authors of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. "They started at first with an extremely high-pressure campaign to avert having sixty countries ratify the Treaty of Rome," relates Amnesty International's Francis Perrin. "Faced with the failure of that strategy, they wanted to force countries to sign immunity agreements that theoretically would prohibit them from transferring American citizens to the Court," he continues. With a weighty argument: if a country refused to sign one of those immunity agreements, the American administration would reserve the right to cut off all military aid, and even the financing of training for judges or anti-AIDS programs. Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, as well as Costa Rica and even Trinidad and Tobago have rejected this blackmail. And have paid dearly for that rebellion: according to the Coalition for the ICC (CICC), a galaxy of NGOs in favor of international justice, twelve Latin American countries have already lost their aid. China Poised to Jump In Ecuador has had to give up 15 million dollars since 2003; Peru, 3 million, Uruguay, at least 1.5 million. "Yet, they have not, nonetheless, given in," states Francesca Varda, a CICC coordinator in New York. Apart from Colombia - the White House's principal ally in Latin America - only a handful of countries, such as Panama or El Salvador, have lowered their guard ... In the United States, many members of Congress have sounded the alarm. For by depriving certain countries of aid, especially military aid, the Bush administration risks seeing other powers, such as China, offer their services, and so get a leg up on the continent ... Translation: t r u t h o u t French language correspondent Leslie Thatcher.
Posted 1:08 PM
by Mary
he Quiet Oil-for-Food Scandal By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted November 4, 2005. We aren't going to hear much about the corporations that paid bribes in the Oil-for-Food scandal because Bush's family, friends and closest advisors are in it knee-deep, along with some Democrats. Tools email EMAIL print PRINT 33 COMMENTS Also in War on Iraq Lying and Dying Redux Stephen Pizzo Terrorism's Training Grounds Zelie Pollon Iraq's War Dead No End In Sight Erik Leaver Syria: The Next Iraq? Robert Dreyfuss More stories by Joshua Holland Last week, the Independent Committee investigating the Oil-for-Food program (OFF) released its final report detailing how Saddam Hussein's regime skimmed just under two percent from the otherwise successful relief effort by charging kickbacks and "inland transportation" fees to companies doing business with Iraq. The small group of conservative writers who I've dubbed the "Scandal Pimps" have been less enthusiastic about the release of this report than they've been about those that preceded it. The day after the release, the Wall Street Journal editorialized that the report didn't really add anything new, it just filled in some details. What they characterized as "details" were actually the names of over 2,000 companies that paid bribes to the Hussein regime for a shot at buying Iraq's oil, selling spare parts for its oil infrastructure or providing humanitarian goods for a population starving under the U.S./ U.K.-led sanctions regime. The Scandal Pimps have been low-key because the final report of the Committee -- known as the Volcker Committee for its chair, former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker -- offers further evidence that what they've worked so hard -- and so successfully -- to portray as a massive UN scandal has always been a relatively modest corporate scandal, interesting more for the players involved than because of its scale. The details the Journal editors referred to include the process by which Saddam and his cronies squeezed what were effectively bribes out of multinational corporations, great and small. Contracts were submitted to the United Nations where they were reviewed by the Security Council states (the U.S. and Britain were the only ones that reviewed every contract). Revenues from approved sales were deposited into UN-administered trusts from which goods could be purchased. But before companies could "lift," or load, oil, they had to come up with some cash for the Iraqi government. Those fees and surcharges were paid directly by the companies either into Iraqi-controlled accounts (mostly in Jordan) or as bags full of cash dropped off at Iraqi embassies around the world. The illicit funds -- widely reported by the media at the time -- never touched UN hands. More to the point, the Scandal Pimps are unlikely to delve too deeply into the final report because it reveals that some of our leading corporations, and the vaunted "entrepenuers" that outlets like the Washington Times always crow about, weren't in the least bit reticent to pay off a brutal dictator accused of mass murder in order to pump up their bottom lines. Even more damning to the conservative worldview is that the United States' "strategic class" was deeply involved. In fact, profits from sales under OFF program that were lubricated with illicit payments to Saddam Hussein found their way into both the Bush and Kerry presidential campaigns of 2004. You wouldn't know that from the modest coverage of this most interesting report. Most of the reporting has focused on the fact that many of the contracts went to French and Russian companies. The Washington Post's take was typical: "most of those allegedly receiving rewards were not Americans. The preponderance of lucrative contracts went to French and Russian companies, on the grounds that their governments opposed the sanctions regime and favored Iraq in the U.N. Security Council." That's technically accurate but substantially false. In a global economy, distinctions between "American" or "French" companies are essentially a joke. The Volcker report paints a picture of layer upon layer of front companies and cut-outs, off-shore subsidiaries and hastily slapped together strategic partnerships: "Iraq's preference for French companies and the limited number of recipients in France for Iraqi crude oil led certain companies to pass themselves off ... as being French-based." The report cites a 1998 letter from a French official to an Iraqi official based in Paris, in which he expressed "his concerns and his government's concerns ... regarding the increase in British and American companies as well as others who exploit the decision of the Iraqi leadership in providing priority to conducting business with French companies by signing contracts with Iraq through their offices in France." The Associated Press reported that "the difficulty of finding out who paid kickbacks in the U.N. Oil-for-Food program is illustrated by two Liechtenstein-based firms, Alcon Petroleum and Fenar Petroleum." Both were set up late in the program -- Alcon in 2000, Fenar in 1999 -- and almost immediately landed huge contracts to buy oil from Iraq. Both companies are registered only under the names of trustee firms, meaning their owners' names and nationalities were undisclosed. After a Reston, Virginia-based firm, Midway Trading, plead guilty to OFF related charges last month, the Washington Times tried to figure out who owned the company. "So far," the Times editors wrote, "the only answer is a shadowy one. There is no directory listing for a Midway Trading in the Reston area and in the past 10 years there is no mention of the company in any major Virginia or Washington newspaper." The Times editors called "the only listed company in Reston called "Midway" for comment -- Midway Oil Holdings, Inc., an offshore holding company with offices in Switzerland and Greece -- but the calls went unanswered, as did an email." The fact is the United States, which consumes about a quarter of the global energy supply, received 36 percent of all oil exports from Iraq -- mostly through middle-men and cut-outs -- and American companies and individuals profited from those sales.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"War does not determine who is right--only who is left." - Bertrand Russell
| 
