Christoph
26-12-06, 20:15
NEW YORK--If a week is a long time in national politics, then a decade is an eternity in international politics. The world has witnessed many profound changes in the 10 turbulent years of Kofi Annan's term as secretary general of the United Nations. Many--but not all--were for the good.
Thus, he oversaw an explosion in U.N. peace operations as testament to the numerous demands and expectations on the organization, yet many operations were dogged by charges of ineffectualness, financial corruption and sexual exploitation.
For some, Annan's legacy is indelibly stained by the horrors of Rwanda, Srebrenica and the oil-for-food scandal. For others, the tragedy of Iraq happened on his watch. Certainly, he must accept some blame for management lapses and bad judgment calls. Yet as the inquiry into the Australian Wheat Board's role in Iraqi sanctions-busting proved conclusively, the major sins of commission and omission, whether intentional or incidental, were committed by national governments, including members of the Security Council, not U.N. officials. If the Security Council is divided, the secretary general cannot be an alternate locus of international diplomacy. If it is united, he cannot be an alternative focus of international dissent.
......
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/world/20061226dy01.htm
Thus, he oversaw an explosion in U.N. peace operations as testament to the numerous demands and expectations on the organization, yet many operations were dogged by charges of ineffectualness, financial corruption and sexual exploitation.
For some, Annan's legacy is indelibly stained by the horrors of Rwanda, Srebrenica and the oil-for-food scandal. For others, the tragedy of Iraq happened on his watch. Certainly, he must accept some blame for management lapses and bad judgment calls. Yet as the inquiry into the Australian Wheat Board's role in Iraqi sanctions-busting proved conclusively, the major sins of commission and omission, whether intentional or incidental, were committed by national governments, including members of the Security Council, not U.N. officials. If the Security Council is divided, the secretary general cannot be an alternate locus of international diplomacy. If it is united, he cannot be an alternative focus of international dissent.
......
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/world/20061226dy01.htm