On Thursday, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon called for action on Syria:
“In Syria, more than 5,000 people are dead. This cannot go on…In the name of humanity, it is time for the international community to act.”
Tag Archive: UN
This is a part of Nascence’s continuing celebration of Human Rights Day 2011.
Here in America we have the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution as our “bill of rights.” But does the global community of humanity have what could be called a bill of rights? One could say so, it started with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) drafted 63 years ago by a group that included the American first lady and human rights advocate, Eleanor Roosevelt. With the UDHR as a foundation two covenants expanded on the international human rights regime: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The covenants entered into force of international law in 1976 once enough nations ratified them and have helped provide guidance to human rights defenders around the world.
So, the “International Bill of Rights” could be said to consist of:
–The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
–The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
–The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966)
SUMMARY of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (from Wikipedia)
SUMMARY of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (from Wikipedia)
Some interesting news for history buffs from The Guardian. The graphic above visualizes (see full graphic here) some statistics on how the former Soviet republics are doing in the post-Cold War era. It appears that the Baltic states (Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia) are doing quite well and the Central Asian states (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc.) have a ways to go or like Belarus might be regressing into some sort of paleo-Soviet regime. In related news, the last Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev, in an interview with The Guardian was refreshingly honest concerning some mistakes he believed he made during that tumultuous period.
In even more Cold War history news, there have long been rumors of a conspiracy regarding the death of the UN’s second secretary-general Dag Hammarskjöld. The Guardian reached observers of the crash who claimed a second plane shot down the UNSG’s plane and that the British government was behind the effort to conceal the details of Secretary Hammarskjöld’s demise. Some heady history.
The second quotable in as many days is what could be considered one possible answer to the question raised by E. O. Wilson’s quote yesterday concerning “what we wish to become”. Emperor Haile Selassie gave a remarkable speech to the UN General Assembly in 1963 outlining “what we must become”
There have been some nice rumblings signifying life out of the UN these days. First, the sanctioning of military action to protect civilians in Libya, then authorization for action in Cote D’Ivoire (which led the to eventual surrender of Laurent Gbagbo) and now we see that a UN Commission has pronounced, for the most part, the failure of the 40-year long drug war suggesting the treatment of drug abuse as a health issue may be a better approach…now if only Western nations heeded advisements from the UN when not serving narrow national interests…Again, this globalist can dream, right?
Who would’ve thought in 2007 that a UN headed by Ban Ki-moon would be so robust and active as he announces his candidacy for a second term?
On February 14, 2003 as the UN Security Council debated continuing inspections in Iraq in the runup to the Second Iraq War the French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin made a speech that I remember to this day as, in my humble and less-educated opinion, one of the greatest speeches made from the halls of the United Nations. One day later tens of millions of people around the world would demonstrate their opposition to the impending military action in what some believe to be the largest global anti-war demonstration in human history. At the time hope was cresting that rising voices of peaceful but determined multitudes might clog the quickly turning cogs of the machinery of war. Of course we know better now but what a summation of “the alternatives to war” in that heady time:
Mr. President, to those who are wondering in anguish when and how we are going to cede to war, I would like to tell them that nothing, at any time, in this Security Council, will be done in haste, misunderstanding, suspicion or fear. In this temple of the United Nations, we are the guardians of an ideal, the guardians of a conscience. The onerous responsibility and immense honor we have must lead us to give priority to disarmament in peace. This message comes to you today from an old country, France, from a continent like mine, Europe, that has known wars, occupation and barbarity. A country that does not forget and knows everything it owes to the freedom-fighters who came from America and elsewhere. And yet has never ceased to stand upright in the face of history and before mankind. Faithful to its values, it wishes resolutely to act with all the members of the international community. It believes in our ability to build together a better world.
Still no word from President Obama and it took Secretary of State Clinton until 5:00PM EST to issue a condemnation of the violence wrought upon peaceful Libyan protesters by members of the Libyan military (naval vessels are bombarding civilian areas of Tripoli and the surrounding areas, the Libyan air force have attacked crowds of protesters in Tripoli and Benghazi and some reports are coming in that Gaddhafi has called in mercenaries as some of the military refuse to attack their own people as ordered). I recently listened to a member of the UK House of Lords, Lord David Owens on Al Jazeera English, adamantly and correctly call for the UN Security Council to meet in emergency session tonight in order to implement some of the advice that Libyan diplomats who have resigned amidst their government’s brutality namely the creation of a no-fly zone over Libya. Lord Owens also encouraged the Security Council to authorize action by forces under the UN to act within the auspices of Section VII of the Charter thereby designating the situation in Libya as a threat to international peace and security.
Personally, I think the rapid pace of developments on the ground in Libya and the pernicious criminality of the Libyan regime make the case for a Rapid Reaction Force able to be quickly mobilized in situations such as this. There is precedent for this as it was done with the Bosnia-Croatia UN mission UNPROFOR.
Agencies and organizations comprising the system of the United Nations are gearing up for 2011. Next year has been designated by the UN as the Year for People of African Descent.
During a Human Rights Day speech current Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon elaborated on the importance of this designation:
“The international community has affirmed that the transatlantic slave trade was an appalling tragedy not only because of its barbarism but also because of its magnitude, organized nature and negation of the essential humanity of the victims. Even today, Africans and people of African descent continue to suffer the consequences of these acts.”
The world’s maps may be changing next January. The southern region of Sudan is due to vote on a referendum that would declare independence based on a 2005 peace agreement ending years of conflict between Khartoum and the southern region of Sudan. Omar al-Bashir, the current president of Sudan, has stated repeatedly that his government will honor the outcome of the referendum but officials from the UN Security Council and elections analysts have expressed some worry over the lack of preparation for the vote–ballot printing, training of elections officials, etc.–and are currently visiting the region and Khartoum to urge the government to hurry its preparations.
The referendum is scheduled for January 9th.
Well this is interesting. Regional rivalries have characterized China’s campaign for reform of the UN Security Council but now the UK has entered the melee. Tomorrow, deputy PM Nick Clegg will unveil the UK’s new push for an enlarged Security Council as a part of a package of reform proposals described as “radical” including enlargement of the Security Council and a strengthened Human Rights Council. Not radical enough in my humble opinion but a nice step forward from one of the permanent members (P-5) of the Security Council.
Also in the UK, the Labour Party leadership election is tomorrow. The Brothers Milliband (David and Ed) are the frontrunners but there are three other contestants in the race: Diane Abbott, Ed Balls and Andy Burnham. Ed Milliband’s service as a cabinet secretary responsible for Britain’s addressing of climate change and environmental stewardship lead me to hope for his victory tomorrow. He is the underdog though with the latest poll putting him 8 points behind his older brother in a run-off.
Analysis from the Stockholm Environment Institute and Third World Network indicate that developed nations are taking advantage of loopholes that could allow for an increase of up to 9% in carbon emissions above 1990 levels (the standard set in Kyoto and more recently in Copenhagen). The Guardian noted this in a story posted today:
Developing countries have argued strongly for minimum 40% emission cuts from industrialised nations by 2020. But new analysis from the Stockholm Environment Institute and Third World Network (TWN), released at the latest UN climate talks in Bonn, showed that current pledges amounted to only 12-18% reductions below 1990 levels without loopholes. When all loopholes were taken into account, emissions could be allowed to rise by 9%.
And there is even more damning information from the story:
In a separate submission to governments, Pablo Solon, Bolivia’s ambassador to the UN, claimed that industrialised countries were filling all the available atmosphere with carbon pollution, and preventing poor countries from developing. Solon quoted peer-reviewed research by leading NASA scientist Jim Hansen and the German government’s Advisory Council on Global Change which, he said, showed that the world had a “budget” of 750 gigatonnes of CO2 over the next 40 years if it sought a 66% chance of holding temperature rises to under 2C. The world had a smaller budget of just 420GT of CO2 if it wanted to stay below 1.5C, as more than 100 countries have so far demanded.
The “period of consequences” that Churchill mentioned in one of his most fateful speeches is fast approaching.
Just finished a book that left me ecstatic. Awesome book! “What’s Wrong with the United Nations and How to Fix It” by Thomas G. Weiss is a wonderful overview of what ails the world organization and what can be done to make it a more robust and effective agency of international development, cooperation and ultimately solidarity. Weiss is a political science professor at City University of New York and co-director of the United Nations Intellectual History Project and former chair of the Academic Council on the United Nations System.
Near the end of the book Weiss contrasts the perspectives of Westphalian and post-Westphalian pessimists who doubt the ability of humanity to overcome the challenges that face our species: the evolution of technology without an ethic to match it, the inequities of globalization, climate change and environmental degradation, overpopulation, pandemics, etc. with optimists and their own views concerning the continuance of the Westphalian system or the ongoing evolution of human governance beyond the nation-state to a “post-Westphalian” system. For an exemplar of post-Westphalian optimism he cites the Australian philosopher of applied ethics Peter Singer:
“Optimists like Peter Singer view globalization as creating a post-Westphalian context of global unity–what he dubs “one world”–in which sovereign states will no represent the outer limits of political community and ethical obligations. Over time, there will be voluntary actions by governments and peoples–akin to what is happening in the European Union, with all its ups and downs–and this gradual process will result in world government.”
Did I mention that Peter Singer is one of my favorite philosophers? :)
New Zealand has topped the Global Peace Index for 2010. According to the Australian think-tank, Institute for Economics and Peace, the nation ranks highest in factors such as contributions to UN peacekeeping (high), military expenditures (low), social unrest (low), and incarceration (low). The US is 85th out of 149 countries with Libya, Cuba and Equatorial Guinea placing higher.
Also, according to the Christian Science Monitor:
“The GPI also confirms a trend recently noted by other tabulations of world conflicts: While cross-border wars and armed disputes have decreased in recent years, the number of internal conflicts such as civil wars has increased.”
You and Nukes
I was running through some beautiful information graphics over at the site informationisbeautiful and found one concerning national nuclear arsenals and the potential threat that they pose to human civilization.
It seemed appropriate to highlight that threat in light of the current UN Conference to Review the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) where the media have focused on the “words” being had between Iran and the US. But there are nine nations currently recognized to be members of the ‘nuclear club’
It seems that as much attention should be given to the post-Soviet nations of the Commonwealth of Independent States as much as it is given to Iran. The danger of unsecured nuclear materials seems as much of a threat as a potentially belligerent, nuclear-armed nation (read Pakistan and India re: Kashmir in 2004).
And I have one problem with this information graphic. Apparently it only considers the vague term ‘complete devastation’ regarding the nukes. But what about secondary effects like fallout which would render large swathes of targeted areas uninhabitable for significant time periods due to irradiation? Would this not pose just as important an impact on human civilization as the initial blast radius?
