Day: June 17, 2019
How the UN serves US interests
The Center for Strategic and International Studies June 13 hosted a panel on “US Interest and Leadership in the United Nations” featuring Catherine Bertini, former Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Programme, and Bill Richardson, former Governor of New Mexico and former US Ambassador to the United Nations. Daniel F. Runde, Senior Vice President and William A. Schreyer Chair and Director of the Project on Prosperity and Development, moderated.
Asked why the US should keep investing in and care about the UN and what the UN does for the US, Bertini said the UN has a responsibility for peace and security. Given the US veto power in the Security Council, Washington has a lot of leverage to pursue American interests. Richardson made a case for multilateralism, saying the US needs international support to advance American goals. With rising populism and anti-institutionalism, bipartisan support is needed to maintain the UN, which surveys show a substantial number of Americans support.
Due to member states (the US included) not paying some or all of their dues, the UN is in a financial crisis. If the US doesn’t pay UN dues it loses leverage and sets a bad example for other nations, who also refuse to pay, causing more harm to US interests in the long run. An audience member pointed out that when the US paid its peacekeeping dues for 8 years straight reforms were made, many peacekeeping missions were completed successfully, and troops could be withdrawn with a solid exit strategy.
Runde asked if the UN is a vehicle for burden sharing, which Bertini affirmed. Washington pays 22% of regular dues and 28% of peacekeeping operations. The peacekeeping operations are vital and decided on by the Security Council. The benefit for the US is that the troops on the ground are not Americans. It would cost the US eight times as much if they were all American soldiers.
Runde listed several common critiques of the UN such as anti-Israel moves, corruption, the human rights commission, and millions of dollars in unpaid parking tickets by UN officials in New York. Richardson said the answer is not to focus on the negatives but to work on marketing and politics, especially aimed at the younger generations. Changing the system right away isn’t going to work, therefore the focus should be on the positives instead of individually rebutting each critique.
Bertini agreed, saying that while some critiques are valid they are only a small piece of the picture. The UN also saves the lives of children, helps feed people, and protects refugees. The UN is also involved in many things such as food safety, copyright law, and postal rules that many people never think about but are part of the international social order.
Richardson also pointed out that UN sanctions brought North Korea to the negotiating table and that the UN World Food Program remains an important humanitarian link that could lead North Korea to reform. Called upon from the audience by Runde, former State Department official Pat Kennedy mentioned that issues such as unpaid parking tickets in New York are often overstated in tabloid media.
Richardson suggested that both a lack of US public understanding of the UN and a perception around the world that Washington dominates the P5 cause lack of support for the UN. He suggests the UN needs more women and people from underrepresented regions in leadership positions at the same time as an updated selection and transition process to ensure that qualified people are hired. Bertini agrees that currently support for transition from one official to another is lacking. Richardson also suggests expanding the Security Council to include Germany and Japan as permanent members without veto power and revamping the rotation system for the regional spots on the UNSC.
Her is a full video of the event:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Humanitarian challenges in North Korea
June 11 the Cato Institute hosted an event on North Korea giving a humanitarian perspective from individuals who have worked in North Korea. The panel featured Heidi Linton, Executive Director of Christian Friends of Korea, Randall Spadoni, North Korea Program Director for World Vision, and Daniel Jasper, Public Education and Advocacy Coordinator for Asia for the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). The panel was moderated by Doug Brandow, a senior fellow at Cato.
Jasper gave an overview of the AFSC’s 66-year effort in North Korea since the organization first answered calls for NGOs to help with reconstruction in 1953, shortly after the cease-fire was agreed upon. Jasper said food security is integral to the current conflict, but sanctions put in place to pressure North Korea restrain humanitarian missions. Travel is disrupted and organizations need to apply for special waivers, which are costly and take up to several months to receive. More than ten million North Koreans are estimated to be food insecure. Jasper also touched on cultural exchanges, reuniting families, and returning the remains of fallen soldiers from the Korean war as efforts that can help build bridges and improve relations without much cost. AFSC recommends removing travel restrictions, adhering to humanitarian exemption clauses, and seeing humanitarian issues as bridges instead of a stick.
Heidi Linton shared personal stories from her recent trip to North Korea with the Christian Friends of Korea, during which she helped set up a hepatitis-B clinic and treat over 360 patients. She too emphasized the unintended consequences of sanctions on ordinary civilians. Last fall’s flooding caused widespread infrastructure damage. Replacement parts for construction and farm equipment are limited due to sanctions. Linton said the US has the capability to help the suffering population through humanitarian missions and show North Koreans that America has good intentions.
Randall Spandoni’s work in North Korea focuses on disaster relief and providing clean water to North Korea’s population, of which 40% does not have regular access to clean water. By building water wells, time is freed up for individuals to work on trade or business and spend time with their families. The health implications of access to clean water are significant. Spandoni echoed his fellow panel members’ view that sanctions and import restrictions hamper NGO humanitarian efforts in North Korea, saying his organization’s latest shipment of well-building equipment took 1.5 years to approve.
Asked in what way the missions have been hampered or restricted by the North Korean government, Linton said that everything done in North Korea is managed by North Korean counterparts and that trust and freedom to act have been built slowly over the past decades. Spandoni added that the general lack of trust makes everything take longer than it would elsewhere. “The bureaucratic system in North Korea is just not structured well to receive aid,” Spandoni noted, adding that the US also imposes many hurdles.
Asked to what extent the aging infrastructure and lack of services is due to capacity issues and to what extent the government just prioritizes other projects, no one on the panel had a clear answer, but Linton restated that the lack of resources, money, and general know-how definitely play into it.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Paying later will cost even more
I spent last week in Kosovo, where the presidency hosted Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright for a celebration of the country’s liberation by NATO forces 20 years ago. For the 90% of the population that is Albanian, half of whom were expelled in 1998 and 1999, the NATO deployment was a source of great joy, enabling them to return en masse. For Serbs and Roma, the moment was terrifying, as some returning Albanians sought revenge on them for Serbian President Milosevic’s depredations.
The main event last week consisted of speeches in the main square, followed by lunch in the fine Swiss Diamond Hotel and a stroll down Mother Teresa Street to dedicate a bust of former Secretary of State Albright, followed by a motorcade to a statue of former President Clinton. I skipped the Clinton statue, as it was beastly hot and sunny, and I needed to prepare for the evening’s conference on Balkans security 20 years after the NATO/Serbia war.
The Kosovars were out in force for the stroll, anxious to show their affections for the United States. American flags were at least as apparent as Kosovo flags, and chants of “USA” broke out with enthusiasm. President Clinton enjoys pressing the flesh and did it with a big smile on his face. Kosovo President Thaci got far less attention and a few boos. Secretary Albright was in good spirits I knew from a chat we had getting off the plane from Munich, but to tell the truth I rarely caught a glimpse of her short stature during the celebration due to the surrounding crowd.
The mood in Pristina these days is anxious. Talks with Belgrade have been going nowhere. European Union member countries, especially France, have been trying to slow progress towards any further enlargement in the Balkans. Montenegro is too small and too far advanced in accession negotiations to stop, I think, but the consensus needed to open accession talks with Macedonia is not solid. Albania is likely blocked for now. Europe’s hesitation darkens the mood throughout the Balkans and perhaps especially in Kosovo, where NATO and EU membership are the country’s strategic goals.
Reaching them is far off. Kosovo legislation must be compatible with EU requirements, but implementation often lags and EU responsiveness is declining. Even after fulfilling elaborate requirements, Kosovo has not been given the EU visa waiver it was promised. President Thaci and Prime Minister Haradinaj, both products of the wartime Kosovo Liberation Army, are at odds, mainly over how to approach “normalization” with Belgrade. Thaci had indicated he was ready to exchange some Serb-populated territory for Albanian-populated territory in Serbia, but that deal has evaporated under examination by critics (including me). Haradinaj opposed Thaci’s unconsummated deal and has imposed tariffs on Serbian goods imported into Kosovo, stalling the talks with Belgrade. Meanwhile, governance in Kosovo is lamentably corrupt and young people are leaving (as they are from most other countries in the Balkans).
So the celebration of NATO liberation was happy, but Kosovo is not. I was stopped in the street one night by three strangers, two brothers and a cousin, and asked to chat with them in a cafe. They lamented the current situation and tried to convince me that all Kosovo’s ills would be solved by union with Albania. They were uninterested in my questioning whether they would be happy to be governed from Tirana, whose politics are even more contentious than Pristina’s. Nor did they want to discuss my suggestion that neither Kosovo’s politicians nor Albania’s were likely to agree to move their capital. They were content with the notion that Serbs would need to move out of Kosovo if Greater Albania comes into existence.
I am not. There is no reason why, if governed fairly, Serbs and Albanians can’t both enjoy a future in Kosovo. But the current international mood–ethnic nationalism and xenophobia–piled on top of Kosovo’s history of the same is making a liberal democratic outcome there and in the rest of the Balkans less likely than at any time during the past 25 years. Europe and America need to find a way of renewing their promises or face the loss of the statebuilding projects in Kosovo as well as in Bosnia and Herzegovina on which they have spent a good deal of time, money, and effort. Their collapse will certainly cost a great deal more.
RSS - Posts
