Reformers at the UN see their plan ruined
THE ambitious reform programme launched by Kofi Annan, the United Nations secretary general, was rejected by member states last night.
With the clock ticking before the arrival of 150 world leaders including Tony Blair and President George W Bush in New York for a summit today, diplomats agreed a compromise deal shorn of many major changes proposed by Mr Annan.
The UN leader had asked the world body for a “San Francisco moment”, a reference to the founding conference of the world body 60 years ago.
But instead, a group referred to by Western diplomats as “headbangers” refused to accept much of what was proposed. The obstructionist group included Egypt, Pakistan, Cuba and Iran.
They blocked sweeping changes to the UN’s discredited human rights machinery and the organisation’s bureaucracy.
The hardline new American ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, with some support from Britain and other European states, had wanted much more radical reforms.
A European diplomat said there was a significant gulf between Mr Annan’s proposals and the fi nal document. But he added: “This is what emerges after 191 nations have put something through the digestive system.”
For the past month there has been a brutal struggle between America, which demands radical reform, and some Third World states, which want very little.
Countries such as Pakistan, Egypt and Syria have rejected American proposals for reforms within the UN, such as allowing Mr Annan to select staff on the basis of ability rather than nationality.
Earlier, a UN official said the Americans seemed prepared for failure rather than sign up to a document they disliked. In that case, diplomats would have to cobble together a ‘‘ mere anodyne statement of principles’’.
Mr Annan’s reform proposals were an attempt to bring the world back together on key issues following the divisive debate over Iraq.
But critics have accused him of seeking too much. A Pakistani diplomat said the ‘‘ traffic was too heavy for the road to bear’’.
Mr Annan’s credibility has been badly damaged by the oil-for-food scandal. Last week the UN’s own inquiry used unprecedented language to describe the failings of the world body.
It described the UN as suffering from ‘‘a litany of deficiencies’’ and said it was incapable of running large humanitarian programmes, one of its primary missions. ‘‘Reform is urgent,’’ it concluded.
Mr Annan wanted action on seven issues. Apart from the human rights commission and reforming the UN administration, these included a new ‘‘peacebuilding commission’’ to help countries such as Afghanistan emerging from confl ict, a promise to protect civilians from genocide, action on disarmament and nuclear weapons proliferation and the promotion of economic development.
The genocide pledge and the peacebuilding commission look likely to survive the negotiations.