I seriously doubt anyone on either 'side' of the political spectrum would not agree that this is proof that the way the U.N. has come to function in the last couple of decades is damn broken.

SOURCE

quote:

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Zimbabwe won approval on Friday to head a key U.N. body charged with promoting economic progress and environmental protection despite protests from the U.S., European nations and human rights organizations. The 53-member Commission on Sustainable Development voted 26-21 with three abstentions on the new chair, said Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado, vice chair of the commission. The chair traditionally rotates among regions of the world and it is Africa's choice this year. The government of Zimbabwe has nominated Francis Nhema, the minister of environment and tourism, to chair the commission. President Robert Mugabe, an 83-year-old who has ruled Zimbabwe since it gained independence from Britain in 1980, has been criticized by the West and domestic opponents for repression, corruption, acute food shortages and gross economic mismanagement that has driven inflation above 2,000 percent -- the highest in the world. Mugabe has acknowledged that police used violent methods against opposition supporters. "We're very disappointed in the election of Zimbabwe as chair," said the U.S. representative to the commission Dan Reifsnyder, deputy assistant secretary for environment and science at the State Department. "We really think it calls into question the credibility of this organization to have a representative from a country that has decimated its agriculture, that used to be the breadbasket of Africa and can't now feed itself," said Reifsnyder. U.S. officials said the commission deals with rural development and sustainable agriculture and Zimbabwe is no role model on those themes. Mugabe's government disrupted the agriculture-based economy in 2000 with violent seizures of white-owned commercial farms, part of a program to redistribute land to poor blacks. The newly elected chairman dismissed questions Friday night about his country's international standing and the appropriateness of Zimbabwe holding such a position in a global body. "I think it's not time to point fingers," said Nhema. "There is never a perfect method, it's always a method which is appropriate to each country. So it's important not only to look at Zimbabwe but to look at each other and see what we can learn." Several European nations have also called Zimbabwe's candidacy inappropriate. On Friday, the Pan African Parliament, a body of the African Union, voted to send a mission to Zimbabwe to investigate alleged human rights abuses "relating to the arrests and detention, assault and murder of political activists and members of the media." "Zimbabwe is hardly a model of good governance or sustainable development or even responsible leadership," Benjamin Chang, deputy spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, said before the vote. "Our concern is that it's potential chairmanship would undermine the commission's credibility." Jennifer Windsor, executive director of the human rights group Freedom House, said before the vote that it was "preposterous" for Zimbabwe to lead any U.N. body. Freedom House is an independent non-governmental organization that has monitored political rights and civil liberties in Zimbabwe since 1980. Windsor said Mugabe's government "clearly has nothing but scorn for the U.N.'s founding principles of human rights, security and international law." The Commission on Sustainable Development was established by the General Assembly in December 1992 to ensure effective follow-up of the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in June that year and implementation of key environmental and development agreements. The commission meets annually in New York, and its current session, which opened Wednesday, is focusing on energy for sustainable development, industrial development, air pollution and climate change.

A country which has 1700% (and rising) year on year inflation has no business chairing a comission on sustainable development. This is much worse than Libya being named head of the Human Rights comission.

About the only thing you will ever find me agree with John Bolton on is that the U.N. has major structural problems that need to be addressed.

MrS

___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel

-"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.

It's honestly like having someone who's a rampaging drunk, turn up with a case of whiskey and leading an AA meeting. I've not had a lot of faith in the UN for some years now as being anything but a token group of elitists and this just sort of confirmed how really useless they are.

the U-muthaf**kin-N! the most corrupt governing body in modern history.

...but we have to listen to them otherwise the left freaks out and calls us Nazis!

Last edited by Q5echo on May-13-2007 at 02:04

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith It's honestly like having someone who's a rampaging drunk, turn up with a case of whiskey and leading an AA meeting. I've not had a lot of faith in the UN for some years now as being anything but a token group of elitists and this just sort of confirmed how really useless they are.

I wouldn't lump ALL branches of the U.N. like that but for the most part, the core is definitely rotten...

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

John Bolton, 1994

quote:

Let me start off with what may seem like a somewhat radical proposition, but I think is important to understand as we consider potential roles for the United Nations over the next ten years. That proposition is, there is no such thing as the United Nations. There is an organization, which is composed of member governments. It does have an entity called the Security Council, which is principally responsible for international peace and security under the charter. But there is no being out there called the United Nations. There’s simply a group of member governments who, if they have the political will, every once in a while, to protect international peace and security, they’re able to do it. Now let’s just take a few examples. In 1950, when…when the Kuomintang still held the Republic of China’s seat the United States was able to pass a series of resolutions opposing North Korea aggression and the invasion of South Korea. They did that because, at that point, the Soviet Union was boycotting the Security Council in protests that Kuomintang still had the Chinese seat. When the, when the Russians came back in, we lost the ability to get resolutions in the Security Council to oppose North Korean aggression. That was 1950. Now let’s go fast forward 40 years to Iraq’s aggression against Kuwait in the Gulf, where President Bush put together an unprecedented international coalition. The first time that major western nations and major Arab nations joined together in a military and political alliance to oppose aggression by another Arab country against another. Only the second time in Security Council’s history, that it authorized the use of force in an international conflict to oppose aggression. Now in both those cases, 1950 and 1990, the reason that the Security Council acted the way it did was because of United States leadership. It wasn’t because the United Nations suddenly grew up. It was because in those two sets of circumstances, it suited the United States, it suited our national interests, used the Security Council in collective security terms to oppose international aggression. Now many people who watch what the Security Council did during the Gulf Conflict and in it’s aftermath, including the relief efforts for the Kurds in, in, northern Iraq misunderstood the lessons that the Gulf Crisis taught us, or should have taught us as we should have learned from the Korea Crisis of 1950. The success of the United Nations during the Gulf War was not because the United Nations had suddenly become successful. It was because the United States, through President Bush, demonstrated what international leadership, international coalition building, international diplomacy is really all about. And many of the problems that have occurred since then in my view, are because people misread the lessons of the Gulf War. If you look at Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia, and the list can go on. Where you’ve seen the UN not terribly successful. Where you’ve seen US leadership failing. Where you’ve seen a whole host of circumstances that have not resulted in political solutions to international crises. It’s because people misread the lessons of the Gulf War and a couple of earlier examples, Namibia and the rest of it. The point that I want to leave with you in this very brief presentation is where I started. Is there is no United Nations. There is an international community that occasionally can be lead by the only real power left in the world, and that’s the United States, when it suits our interests and when we can get others to go along. And I think it would be a real mistake to count on the United Nations as if it’s some disembodied entity out there that can function on its own. When the United Na, when the United States leads, the United Nations will follow. When it suits are interests to do so, we will lead. When it does not suit our interests to do so, we will not. And I think that is the most important thing to carry away tonight.

Wow...the U.N. just keeps diggin'...

quote:

Zimbabwe to head key U.N. body UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Zimbabwe won approval on Friday to head a key U.N. body charged with promoting economic progress and environmental protection despite protests from the U.S., European nations and human rights organizations. The 53-member Commission on Sustainable Development voted 26-21 with three abstentions on the new chair, said Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado, vice chair of the commission. The chair traditionally rotates among regions of the world and it is Africa's choice this year. The government of Zimbabwe has nominated Francis Nhema, the minister of environment and tourism, to chair the commission. President Robert Mugabe, an 83-year-old who has ruled Zimbabwe since it gained independence from Britain in 1980, has been criticized by the West and domestic opponents for repression, corruption, acute food shortages and gross economic mismanagement that has driven inflation above 2,000 percent -- the highest in the world. Mugabe has acknowledged that police used violent methods against opposition supporters. "We're very disappointed in the election of Zimbabwe as chair," said the U.S. representative to the commission Dan Reifsnyder, deputy assistant secretary for environment and science at the State Department. "We really think it calls into question the credibility of this organization to have a representative from a country that has decimated its agriculture, that used to be the breadbasket of Africa and can't now feed itself," said Reifsnyder. U.S. officials said the commission deals with rural development and sustainable agriculture and Zimbabwe is no role model on those themes. Mugabe's government disrupted the agriculture-based economy in 2000 with violent seizures of white-owned commercial farms, part of a program to redistribute land to poor blacks. The newly elected chairman dismissed questions Friday night about his country's international standing and the appropriateness of Zimbabwe holding such a position in a global body. "I think it's not time to point fingers," said Nhema. "There is never a perfect method, it's always a method which is appropriate to each country. So it's important not only to look at Zimbabwe but to look at each other and see what we can learn." Several European nations have also called Zimbabwe's candidacy inappropriate. On Friday, the Pan African Parliament, a body of the African Union, voted to send a mission to Zimbabwe to investigate alleged human rights abuses "relating to the arrests and detention, assault and murder of political activists and members of the media." "Zimbabwe is hardly a model of good governance or sustainable development or even responsible leadership," Benjamin Chang, deputy spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, said before the vote. "Our concern is that it's potential chairmanship would undermine the commission's credibility." Jennifer Windsor, executive director of the human rights group Freedom House, said before the vote that it was "preposterous" for Zimbabwe to lead any U.N. body. Freedom House is an independent non-governmental organization that has monitored political rights and civil liberties in Zimbabwe since 1980. Windsor said Mugabe's government "clearly has nothing but scorn for the U.N.'s founding principles of human rights, security and international law." The Commission on Sustainable Development was established by the General Assembly in December 1992 to ensure effective follow-up of the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in June that year and implementation of key environmental and development agreements. The commission meets annually in New York, and its current session, which opened Wednesday, is focusing on energy for sustainable development, industrial development, air pollution and climate change.

>>Source<<

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

mr squirrel just posted that exact story at the start of the thread

___________________
new set online, Summer Journeys

doh, I thought it was different...my bad...

I'll try and find the one I meant to post...

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

here it is...

quote:

Fury at Zimbabwe UN role West outraged as African nations help elect key minister to head environmental body Tracy McVeigh, foreign editor Sunday May 13, 2007 The Observer A major rift between the West and Africa was exposed at the United Nations this weekend as Zimbabwe was controversially elected as head of the UN's main environment body. Diplomats from the European Union and the US had strongly objected to a country that has destroyed a once-thriving farming industry, has a failing economy, an appalling human rights record and a poor record of looking after its wildlife and national parks, holding the post. Article continues But in a secret ballot at the UN in New York, Zimbabwe was elected to lead the Commission on Sustainable Economic Development (CSD) by a 26-21 vote with three abstentions. It seems developing countries voted for Zimbabwe in a direct show of defiance against developed ones. EU nations led the objections to Zimbabwe's candidacy in a heated debate late on Friday. The CSD's entire two-week session had earlier come under attack for its scripted speeches and inability to find common targets for green policies. The conference was brought to an end with no consensus after the 25-member EU refused to approve a paper that included no concrete measures. The meetings then descended into further upset after the vote in favour of Zimbabwe's environment and tourism minister, Francis Nhema. The post rotates among regions and Nhema was Africa's choice to lead the commission for the next year. Nhema, as a member of President Robert Mugabe's government, is the subject of an EU travel ban, meaning he cannot travel to Europe to meet ministers on commission business. Nhema responded by saying Western nations had the 'right to their opinions'. 'At the end of the day the majority rules as democracy does,' he said. Many observers believe the result was an overwhelming snub to the US and the EU by developing nations, especially those in South America, who respected both the African block's decision and their refusal to be pushed around by former colonial masters. 'When they tell the African group to change, it's an insult to our intelligence,' said Zimbawe's ambassador to the UN, Boniface Chidyausiku. 'It's our right (to hold the chair). We're members of the United Nations and we're members of CSD, and the Africa group did make a decision and endorsed Zimbabwe.' Germany's environment minister, Sigmar Gabriel, pointed out that the travel ban against Mugabe's government meant Nhema would be restricted in his contact with those countries. 'It would not be possible for us to invite the chair, if it is from the government of Zimbabwe, or to have contacts with the chair,' said Gabriel, whose country holds EU's current presidency. Zimbabwe is suffering its worst economic crisis since independence in 1980 with inflation currently at 2,200 per cent and expected to rise. Mugabe's policies, including the seizure of white-held farms to resettle landless blacks and to give as gifts to his political allies - including Nhema, himself, who was given a 2,500 acre farm said to lie mostly idle - are blamed. There is increasing controversy over the nature of international relations with Zimbabwe - last week it was revealed by the country's state-controlled newspaper, the Herald, that the football governing body FIFA had given South Africa permission to allow visiting teams to base themselves in Zimbabwe during the 2010 World Cup, while Australians are debating whether the nation's cricket team should tour in Zimbabwe. The Australian government is considering legal action to prevent the cricket team from touring Zimbabwe in September. 'Zimbabwe's election will be seen as an outrage by millions of people who look to the United Nations for help to escape from poverty,' the British minister for climate change and the environment, Ian Pearson, said in a statement. 'They will be asking how the body charged with promoting sustainable development will be able to maintain credibility while being chaired by a representative of a government whose failed policies have destroyed its own economy.' Minister for Africa Lord Triesman also stressed his opposition to the appointment, saying: 'For a Zimbabwean minister to chair the commission while his own people suffer the appalling consequences of his government's policies, is wholly inconsistent with the commission's aims. 'It damages the credibility of the commission itself and its ability to deal with issues affecting the livelihoods of millions from the poorest countries.'

>>Source<<

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6665749.stm

Inflation numbers were just released. It rose from 1700% two months ago, to 2200% last month, to 3700% this month.

I suppose the only thing that is sustainable growthwise in Zimbabwe is the inflation rate.

The long-term ramifications of the problems in Africa have always concerned me more than the whole "holy war" terrorism thing, as I think there really is little that can be done to change the variables of the situation.


MrS

___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel

-"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.

to be quite honest there are maybe 2 or 3 countries in the world that i would deem competent enough to chair a committee on sustainable development, and no Zimbabwe is not on that list, but neither is Canada or the US for that matter. based on rampant energy useage alone Canada and the US fail miserably.

Canada ducks behind their big umbrella of Kyoto goals, but by doing so creates such eco friendly plans as shutting down Ontario's remaining coal fired power facilities and buying surplus energy from the US to meet demand..... who generates their power how????? *drum roll* COAL..... and with the prevailing winds were does that lovely plume of smog end up???? ONTARIO

geniuses....

Canada and the US's push for green energy has fallen far behind the efforts of some EU nations, namely germany and denmark who have invested heavily in wind generation which is one of the few true green energy forms (well it wreaks havoc on migratory birds but you cant win em all)

while Zimbabwe may not have the worlds greatest inflation rate, they dont have near the unchecked consumption of resources that we have in north america.

But honestly i would have picked denmark or germany for the job.... at least i can scruitinize their credentials and not burst out laughing.....

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I have 3 hobbies: gaming, DJing & correcting maladjusted fools on the internet.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Yeah, I’d like to know what horrible, scarring incident in your childhood turned you into such an ignorant, intellectual-hating philistine?

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp to be quite honest there are maybe 2 or 3 countries in the world that i would deem competent enough to chair a committee on sustainable development, and no Zimbabwe is not on that list, but neither is Canada or the US for that matter. based on rampant energy useage alone Canada and the US fail miserably. Canada ducks behind their big umbrella of Kyoto goals, but by doing so creates such eco friendly plans as shutting down Ontario's remaining coal fired power facilities and buying surplus energy from the US to meet demand..... who generates their power how????? *drum roll* COAL..... and with the prevailing winds were does that lovely plume of smog end up???? ONTARIO geniuses.... Canada and the US's push for green energy has fallen far behind the efforts of some EU nations, namely germany and denmark who have invested heavily in wind generation which is one of the few true green energy forms (well it wreaks havoc on migratory birds but you cant win em all) while Zimbabwe may not have the worlds greatest inflation rate, they dont have near the unchecked consumption of resources that we have in north america. But honestly i would have picked denmark or germany for the job.... at least i can scruitinize their credentials and not burst out laughing.....

when talking of sustainable development, we as Americans have led the way for decades in terms of gross output and given energy used.

for all the 20-25% of total worlds energy we use, we continue to produce the lionshare of the world's output. as a country of over 300,000,000 pop. we are by far more efficient at what we do than any country in the world in the history of the world across the board.

this isn't about America. this is about an effort fostering developing countries to use their resources wisely through candid and transparent cooperation of policies set through what is supposed to be a fair and impartial governing body. none of that is happening at the UN.

i can't speak for Canada...they have Celine Dion though.