Ebou,

I think what you said here also echoes what the individual who sent me the
private email said, that there is a reason that the Secretary General
position is given to people from developing  countries because essentially,
it is the super powers who ultimately control what transpires at the U.N.

The following point you raise is interesting, you said that:

"the power arrangements within the UN framework ought to  be redesigned for
that body to generate any credible results of substance."

This I think, is the essence of this whole exchange. The question then
becomes, who is going to spearhead this need for a new organization of the
U.N? I still say that while Anna cannot do this singlehandedly, at least, he
can at least make an attempt  to have such an agenda for a well needed change
if the U.N is to have any future, even if he fails at it.
It is a resignation to accept that this is the way things are that I find
unacceptable. Clearly, Annan will need the backing of the members of the U.N
that are deemed the "small fry" by the big guys, and I think that there is
already a realization of the problem and voices raised about this problem. I
listened to an interview on Public Radio with Thabo Mbeki last night in which
he mentioned that up to his point, there has been a sort of "apartheid"
directed at some of the member countries, and especially African countries,
so I think that despite the odds, I still believe some changes can be brought
about, the question is, how does one go about it.

Jabou Joh


In a message dated 9/8/00 11:48:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< There is a gross dissonance that exist within the rarified
 language and the explicit ideals of the UN Charter.  For example, the
 Articles 10-14 of the Charter gives the General Assembly power to ONLY make
 recommendations to the Security Council.  The UN Security Council has the
 ultimate jurisdiction to make any decision, regardless of any debates or
 recommendations of the General Assembly.  Once a political matter is before
 the agenda of the Security Council, there is nothing the General Assembly
 can do about again.
 Therefore one can justifiably argue that the UN is de facto a government of
 the five permanent members.  I will even forgive one's stretch of reality
 callng it "dictatorship" of the US by other means.  Also the inherent
 contradictions of the UN, especially that between national sovereignty and
 the executive performance of the UN organization is a perennial albatross
 that paralyzes the office of the Secretary General. This is why I argue that
 Mr Koffi Annan is strictly limited to the use of rational persuasion and
 prudent formulation of agreements that are already mandated by the Security
 Council, and blessed by the US of course.

 Greetings.

 Ebou
 _________________________________________________________________________
 Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

 Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
 http://profiles.msn >>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------