| |
Contributions from
the Column
Studies and reports
Public research on GMOs
CSR in the sports footwear industry
Management shake-up at the UN
Tsunami: Debt moratorium makes sense
03/2005 |
|
[ Senior management ]
Shake-up at the UN
Some key positions within the United Nations have been reassigned, and observers now wonder to what extent UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is bowing to US pressure. Annan has appointed Ann Veneman, George W. Bush’s former Secretary- of Agriculture, as the new Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund UNICEF. According to media reports, the Bush administration was increasingly unhappy with the previous UNICEF director, Carol Bellamy, another US citizen, and considered Bellamy’s views on sex education and contraception as too liberal. Even before her appointment, Veneman has stated that she did not consider these issues to be important for UNICEF’s work, and that she would put an end to frictions with Washington. With a view on Veneman’s new role, Annan said: “Obviously, relationships and contacts in Washington will be helpful as we have in the past used contacts and relationships of others.”
According to Annan, there will be more personnel changes: “Several people were going to leave anyway, so I decided to take a look at the whole team.” Annan acknowledged that his decisions are influenced by the allegations of corruption made against members of the Oil-for-Food aid programme for Iraq. With regard to the first interim report by former US Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, who is investigating the matter, Annan said that it was obvious “that we have work to do in the management area and we need clearer transparency, which I intend to work on.”
It is not unusual for the USA and other major UN members to attempt to fill key positions when there are options for change. But UN experts feel that the campaign against Annan by conservative members of the US congress and the Bush administration has taken on a new quality in the past few months. Because of this campaign, some American diplomats and scholars, who are well disposed to the UN, had advised Kofi Annan to repair relations with the US as a matter of urgency. A group of pro-UN foreign policy experts met in private in late 2004. One participant told the New York Times that the goal was “to save Kofi and rescue the UN”.
Shortly after the meeting, Annan appointed Mark Malloch Brown, the administrator of the UN Development Programme UNDP, as his new chief of staff. This London-born UN official (who is also US citizen) is held in high regard in Washington. According to UN experts, his switch from head of the UNDP to the General Secretariat amounts to a demotion in career terms. The fact that Annan has nevertheless asked this favour of his old companion indicates the enormous pressure he is under. Insiders say that appointing Malloch Brown was Annan’s only way to save his own job, and that Malloch Brown was to serve as a sort of right-hand man for Annan. In early February, Malloch Brown assured members of the US congress that the UN would cooperate with Washington as closely as possible in resolving the Oil-for-Food scandal.
Kieran Prendergast, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, will also have to quit. Apparently, US officials’ dissatisfaction plays a part here too. According to an employee of a research institute in New York, who wished to remain anonymous, the Bush administration blames Prendergast for a statement Annan made against US troops invading the Iraqi rebel stronghold of Fallujah in early November 2004. While Annan wanted to appoint Prendergast as the new UN Middle East envoy, the USA apparently also vetoed that decision. “He would have been perfect, but we don’t work in a vacuum,” Mr Annan was quoted by the Financial Times.
The influence of the USA and Israel is evident in another senior management decision. After nine years, Peter Hansen, the head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), must leave his position. According to a UN spokeswoman, the Secretary-General was of the view that it was time for a change. However, the British newspaper The Guardian reports that Hansen said that “certain groups” in the USA and Israel had influenced the decision not to reappoint him. In Jerusalem, the Dane is considered to be an “Israel hater”. Newspaper reports claim that, for some time, the Bush administration had indicated to Annan that they wanted Hansen out.
Hansen had often criticised the Israeli governments attitude towards Palestinians. He unapologetically stated: “My job is not to put myself at the midpoint between the Israeli view and the refugees’ view. My job was to represent the refugees.” Recently, Hansen became the target of harsh criticism when it emerged that the UNRWA employed members of Hamas – a fact Hansen did not dispute. In the late 1990s, there was talk of the UNRWA in connection with corruption allegations. The World Jewish Congress reacted to Hansen’s departure with undisguised joy: “We would be pleased to dump the vast majority of UN personnel. One person at a time will have to do for now, but let’s not wait too long to get to the top of the heap.” (ell)
|
