Scaled-Back U.N. Reform Plans

NYT reports aced with the imminent arrival of more than 170 presidents and prime ministers, negotiators agreed Monday to resolve differences blocking acceptance of the centerpiece document for this week's summit meeting on combating poverty and reforming the United Nations. The breakthrough, ending three weeks of tense day and night talks, occurred late Monday when ambassadors adopted compromise language across a range of issues.

Thank God we had John Bolton there to remove the worst language

The changes undercut the ambitions and scope of the 45-page document, but brought an end to an impasse that had threatened the United Nations with fresh embarrassment just a week after findings of mismanagement and corruption in the oil-for-food program were reported by Paul A. Volcker, a former Federal Reserve chairman who headed an investigation into the program. The final version was expected to emerge Tuesday, the eve of the three-day gathering of world leaders. "What we can say now is that we will have a document that will reflect what is politically possible right now among 191 members," said Gunter Pleuger, the German ambassador.

That is all you will ever have, as long as all 191 members are seeking freebies from the Democracies that have decent economies. What we need is for the UN to move to a third world country, so they can see how they like it there, and for the building in New York be replaced by a new Union of Democratic Nations.

"It may not be the great reform idea that Kofi Annan put into the world two years ago and might not meet with the excitement of all member states and of the press, but it will be an important step in the direction of a basic reform of the U.N.," he said. Jean-Marc de la Sablière, the French ambassador, said, "The text is not an ideal text, but there is enough substance in it for us to have a good summit." The United States delegation also tried to put a good face on the outcome, though it expressed disappointment in not obtaining pledges for thorough management reform.

Considering the other nations did not want reform, any is better than nothing.

Noting that the proposals fell far short of "the kind of cultural revolution that we need in United Nations management and governance," John R. Bolton, the United States ambassador, said: "Reform is not a one-night stand. Reform is forever. That's why we're going to continue to work on it."

I hope you will.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, speaking to reporters and editors at The New York Times, said, "If there's a concern right now with the U.N., it is that we really do need a strong reform agenda on the key issues - management reform, secretariat reform." [Click here to read a transcript.] The draft document addresses seven main issues: a new human rights council to replace the discredited human rights commission; steps to promote development and reduce poverty; a new peace-building commission; a management overhaul; nuclear nonproliferation; terrorism and a measure to allow international intervention when countries fail to protect their populations from genocide.

In many cases, the solution was to substitute specific goals with broad statements of principle, leaving the details to the upcoming yearlong General Assembly session. Progress had stalled over management reform because of resistance by some countries to proposals by the United States, Europe and other big donor countries to vest more power and executive flexibility in the secretary general's office. The nations of the developing world say they are reluctant to cede power from the General Assembly.

Then let us see the General Assembly do more than produce motions supporting dictatorships, and opposing Democracies.

Max Lawson, a policy adviser for the aid organization Oxfam International, said groups like his were let down by watered-down language on development assistance.

Which would have required us to provide 0.7 % of our GNP for them to spend as they wanted to.