| rdfs:comment
| - In recent years there have been many calls for reform of the United Nations. There is, however, little clarity, let alone consensus, about what "reform" might mean in practice. Some want the UN to play a greater or more effective role in world affairs, others want its role reduced to humanitarian work. In 2004 and 2005, allegations of mismanagement and corruption regarding the Oil-for-Food Programme for Iraq under Saddam Hussein led to renewed calls for reform.
|
| abstract
| - In recent years there have been many calls for reform of the United Nations. There is, however, little clarity, let alone consensus, about what "reform" might mean in practice. Some want the UN to play a greater or more effective role in world affairs, others want its role reduced to humanitarian work. In 2004 and 2005, allegations of mismanagement and corruption regarding the Oil-for-Food Programme for Iraq under Saddam Hussein led to renewed calls for reform. An official reform programme was initiated by United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan shortly after starting his first term on January 1, 1997. Reforms mentioned include changing the permanent membership of the Security Council (which currently reflects the power relations of 1945); making the bureaucracy more transparent, accountable and efficient; making the UN more democratic; and imposing an international tariff on arms manufacturers worldwide. The United States Congress has shown particular concern with reforms related to UN effectiveness and efficiency. In November 2004, H.R. 4818 mandated the creation of a bipartisan Task Force to report to Congress on how to make the United Nations more effective in realizing the goals of its Charter. The Task Force came into being in January 2005, co-chaired by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell. In June 2005, the task force released "American Interests and UN Reform: Report of the Task Force on the United Nations," [1] with numerous recommendations on how to improve UN performance. On June 17, 2005, the United States House of Representatives passed a bill (H.R. 2745) to slash funds to the UN in half by 2008 if it does not meet with certain criteria laid out in the legislation. This reflects years of complaints about anti-American and anti-Israeli bias in the United Nations. The United States of America is estimated to contribute about 22% of the UN's yearly budget, making this bill potentially devastating to the UN. The Bush administration and several former US ambassadors to the UN have warned that this may only strengthen anti-America sentiment around the world and would only serve to hurt current UN reform movements. The bill passed the House in June, and a parallel bill was introduced in the Senate by Gordon Smith on July 13 :. However, a number of leading Senate Republicans objected to the requirement that the US contributions be halved in the event that the UN failed to meet all of the criteria. The UN Management, Personnel, and Policy Reform Act of 2005 (S. 1383), introduced July 12, 2005 into the Senate by Sen. Coleman, Norm [R-MN] and Sen. Lugar, Richard [R-IN], called for similar reforms but left the withholding of dues to the discretion of the President [2]. As of December 2005, neither bill has come to a vote. In September 2005, the United Nations convened a World Summit that brought together the heads of most of its 191 member states, in a plenary session of the General Assembly's 60th session. The UN billed the summit as "a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take bold decisions in the areas of development, security, human rights and reform of the United Nations" [3]. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan had proposed that the summit agree upon a global “grand bargain” to reform the United Nations, revamping international systems for addressing peace and security, human rights and development to make those systems capable of addressing the extraordinary challenges facing the United Nations in the 21st century. No such grand bargain emerged. Instead, world leaders agreed upon piecemeal reforms: the creation of a Peacebuilding Commission to provide a central mechanism to help countries emerging from conflict; agreement that the international community has the right to step in when national governments fail to fulfil their “responsibility to protect” their own citizens from atrocity crimes, a vague promise to create a better UN institution on human rights, and agreement to devote more resources to the UN's internal oversight agency. Although the UN's member states achieved little in the way of reform of the UN bureaucracy, Secretary General Kofi Annan continued to carry out reforms under his own authority. He established a ethics office, responsible for administering new financial disclosure and whistleblower protection policies. As of late December 2005, the UN Secretariat was completing a review of all General Assembly mandates more than five years old. That review is intended to provide the basis for decision-making by the member states about which duplicative or unnecessary programs should be eliminated.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)