Saturday, May 17, 2008

Is It Ok To Go Tanning After Eyebrows Waxed



- Narco global enclaves ...

TPSIPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC


February 2008 Good Government in February 2008

global enclaves
narcos Oswaldo de Rivero

drug
Today moving global financial resources of around 400 billion dollars annually. Of these, more than 5 billion goes directly to farmers in developing countries and 100 billion to end drug trafficking. When farmers and drug traffickers operating in the territory of a country is integrated into this financial flow, the territory where the act becomes a narco enclave with enormous financial resources that allow you to defend militarily and also radiate corruption and political influence in the field national.

These powerful enclaves exist in regions of the world that are profitable due to climatic conditions for growing coca and poppy and get cocaine and heroin the two most sought after hard drugs in the world. In Asia there are two major global producers of heroin enclaves, the "Golden Crescent" and the Golden Triangle. The first crop includes Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Turkey and the second of Burma, Laos and Thailand. In Latin America the enclave are predominant exporter of cocaine in Colombia, but there are clear indications that is forming a new global enclave in Peru, in the valleys of Apurimac and Ene rivers (VRAI)

enclaves when they achieve global narcos export a critical mass of heroin or cocaine maintaining and begin to be governed and defended by drug traffickers who become in real warlords defenders with modern weapons and ferocity plantations, processing facilities and marketing channels, like home. These territories are de facto autonomous state authorities where they exist, they are bought or deterred.

Defending the global narco enclave creates a sort of perpetual conflict, a sort of war of the end of the world, with long periods of violence, armed truce and the resumption of violence as it does in Colombia and in Asia. Also these sites have a large global drug reproductive fitness. When a territory is under pressure from new emerging eradication either in the same country or in neighboring countries, as happened with Plan Colombia, which has brought forth new crops in that country and also favored the expansion of crops in the VRAI.

Today, Peru is the second largest producer of cocaine, produces 29% of world production and the global economic fact already defends narco-mercenaries and assassins in the Central Huallaga and especially now in the VRAI, which emerged as the leading producer of coca in Peru, where he also is involved Mexican drug mafia.

Since 2004 there have been nearly 100 incidents, attacks and attacks with powerful modern weapons against drug policies. The bombers are not terrorists or guerrillas who want power in Peru, but remnants of Sendero and new recruits ex-police officers, graduates and young people have joined the drug trade to participate in the global gains it provides. Although a mattress marxistoide thunders are an armed gang of drug traffickers who fiercely defends his golden underground capitalist enclave.

The buoyant exports of cocaine to the United States and Europe, via the Mexican ports of Peru without need of TLC and all these attacks and military reprisals against the seizure and eradication of cocaine and plantations in Peru suggests that already is achieving the critical mass of production and export of cocaine necessary to emerge a few global enclave in VRAI perennial.

If this happens, Peruvian society will be even more corrupt than it is. Drug interests infiltrate the economy, politics, justice, sport, as has happened in all countries with narcos globalized enclaves. Moreover, the new Peruvian narco enclave "will work" to hundreds of unemployed youth who will change the cloth to wash cars with a Kalashnikov and earn in dollars. Be members of the "army of liberation" but with better ideological camouflage the FARC, because Peru has more historical pirouettes Colombia. Thus, the new cadets will be drug rights advocates ancestral Peruvian coca cultivation (narco enclave) against a "corrupt state and sold to the empire."
The establishment of a global drug enclave in Peru in the VRAI not easily be eradicated by military force. In Colombia there has been not with the help of the United States. We must avoid falling into a similar perpetual conflict. There must be fought militarily but only prevent the production of cocaine out as easily across borders and ports of Peru and at the same time, prevent money laundering in the country and abroad. In short, we must take the spot in training their local and global financial connection to let poor.

If this is not done and the enclave is perpetuated in Peru, the division of territory and the monopoly of the use of force by the state will lose. The country then gradually become an "ungovernable chaotic entity" like Colombia, where the government has to negotiate with drug traffickers, as if they were another sovereign territorial entity.

Shower Door Deflector Replacement

our common position in the Hague against Chile.

- our common position in the Hague ...

TPSIPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC
January 2008 interview


our common position in the Hague

FROM CHILE Http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/24414


The citizenry must be kept informed


05/01/2008
(RED) Ref

What development?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/20276

Primera Plana

04/01/2008

Our argument in The Hague 200 miles
prevent Chile achieved

the Court declared incompetent and have to keep the public informed
says
Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero. ----------------------------------------------

------------
Veteran diplomat
dedicated to high consultancy work in Geneva, Switzerland, Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero loses contact with Peru and is alert to
key issues of our foreign policy, as the crucial maritime boundary dispute with Chile, the speaker in this interview.

Does Allan Wagner is the ideal person for this topic?

, Ambassador Wagner is an experienced diplomat. I see that the Diplomatic Agent has been appointed to the Court in The Hague. However, this function does not exist
in the Statute or the procedures of this court. There are only agents, dry, without the addition of "diplomat."

Agent, period, I is the litigant, a highly specialized lawyer in the matter of trial and, especially, in the proceedings of the Court. So
not know if Wagner is going to have that role as Agent (trial) or the Diplomat Agent work is another. I think that before filing the lawsuit is necessary to clarify this issue. Marisol ambassadors Aguiero Colunga, José Chávez Soto and Jean Devis Chauny would work with Wagner.

"The appointees are competent. However, countries litigating at The Hague have older equipment. About 3 or 4 foreign jurists specialized in the substance of the trial and also in the procedures of the Court, and as advisers and lawyers about 4 or 5 national lawyers with prestige and experience as litigators and academics on law of the sea and especially maritime delimitation. Ambassador Manuel Rodriguez has just introduced the only book that focuses on what should be the position of Peru. I know he is
good relations with the government, but it is a State issue and a trial that will last longer than the period of this Government. Should convene.

What should be exposed as a fundamental?

"The fundamental issue is that Peru can not lack of 200 miles and Chile have them, when both countries since 1947, defended and propagated along the 200-mile view and succeeded was accepted in the current maritime law. Both countries must be 200 miles and that is possible.

What should be the strategy of our country?

"First we must prepare very well to prevent Chile achieved the Court has no jurisdiction or inadmissible Peruvian demand. Second, entering into the substance always invoke equity to achieve a maritime delimitation Peru that gives the 200 miles that are between Arequipa and Tacna. Third, to stop the domination of Chile on what that country calls, without any legal basis, its Sea Face, an offshore area which prevents the exercise Peru 200 miles. Fourth, that the maritime boundary begins on the shore
the sea.

Roberto MacLean said the suit is well prepared.

"I have not seen the lawsuit. But I think he has very good reason. I repeat: this is a sensitive, specialized, it is not easy. It must listen to many legal and political opinions. Should be informed citizens. It is a state matter, not government. `


Embj. Manuel Rodriguez in the OAS



GOOD TRANSLATION "legal mechanisms in trials at the Hague International Court of approaches are mainly written, called, or anti-Memoirs Memoirs and other writings. There are also oral arguments where the agent must know how to respond to questions asked by the judges and experts. The language at issue in the Court are French and English, to make some management out of those languages \u200b\u200bshould make an exception to the Court. We must take this really seriously, because a bad defense or a bad translation can be very expensive ..

How long will this process take between Peru and Chile?

-The Hague trials are long. Only the issue of whether the Court is competent or can not take 3 years and the trial itself
about 5 years or more.

Marilyn Sakova Y Milena Velba

Is Iraq another Vietnam?

- Is Iraq another Vietnam ...


TPSIPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC
March 2004


Is Iraq another Vietnam?
Oswaldo de Rivero (*)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/17892

A wave of pessimism scab the press and political circles Americans face urban military insurgency in Iraq and the growth of U.S. casualties. Concerned, above all, the union of the Shiites and Sunnis fighters and also the total lack of conditions for transferring power to the interim Iraqi government next July first, as President Bush continues to promise.

In all the comments raise the specter of Vietnam, to the point that President of the United States has had to publicly declare that what is happening in Iraq is not what happened in Vietnam. Without doubt, the Vietnam analogy is wrong in military terms. Shiites and Sunnis fighters are not an army under a single command, militarily capable and well armed, as was the Vietcong. Nor are stocked like this with modern weapons by Soviet and Chinese allies. Also, unlike Vietnam, the fighting has not carried out in difficult tropical forests, but, rather, are urban battles that involve significant civilian casualties. Much less, low U.S. in Iraq are comparable to those suffered in Vietnam. In Iraq there are on average two to three American casualties per day, while those from Vietnam came to 70 per day, which quickly accumulated amount in thousands of lost lives and brought about the massive protest in the United States.

While military analogy with Vietnam is wrong, the analogy is not political. In fact, in Iraq as in Vietnam, U.S. occupation forces have failed to win politically, the minds and hearts of the population. In this case most of the Iraqi population as the Vietnamese reject the U.S. intervention, and even more in Iraq, most of the population identifies with the provisional government, which they consider "puppet" for having been almost appointed by the occupying power.

A year after the easy invasion of Iraq, rejecting political and armed resistance to American occupation, as in the case of Vietnam, is becoming more fierce than ever. The U.S. presence, as happened in Vietnam is failing to build a modern secular democracy. Conversely, if they had elections in Iraq today is very likely to win the Shiite faction, supported by other Islamists and the result could be an Islamic republic, but not like that of Iran, enough Koranic and far from the American vision of democracy.

The most important political analogy of Iraq to Vietnam is the desperation of the Bush administration to seek an honorable exit from Iraq, as the government sought to Johnson and Nixon in Vietnam. In pursuit of this output, the current U.S. administration, as mentioned, not finding, it will affect his popularity to the American people. A recent survey by CNN and the Times Magazine reveals that for the first time, 49% of Americans support the administration of President Bush and 51% did not approve his Iraq policy

not only the political situation in Iraq is analogous to Vietnam, but, even, one might say that it is more difficult because, at least, in Saigon, the United States had large anti-communist allies, as the armed forces and the petty bourgeoisie in South Vietnam, which States do not have today in Baghdad. In contrast, today both Sunnis and Shiites fighting the U.S. presence. Also, how U.S. occupation forces have divided their occupation in a Kurdish area, another Sunni and one Shiite further exacerbated the religious divide in the country and becoming less governable.

All this can have a powerful ally iraquizar Iraqi conflict as vietnamizó the Vietnam War. Recent units of the new Iraqi army, trained by the U.S., have refused to fight in Fallujah and Ramadi against his fellow Shiites or Sunnis. Also, many of the policemen and soldiers have deserted and some of them have begun to fight the Marines and the Army. Even members of the interim government, appointed by the U.S., have protested against the excessive repression of U.S. forces in Fallujah and have been on the brink of resignation.

In conclusion, it is becoming more difficult to transfer political power to Iraqi authorities in Baghdad that are both truly allies of the United States and have further legitimacy to the people Iraq.

Iraq today resembles more a chaotic situation and or Lebanese Palestinian intifada, where several rebel factions fought and are fighting today against the Israeli occupation, but none of these is truly representative rebel factions to negotiate an honorable exit. If American forces leave Iraq today, this country would implode into a black hole where all the factions that make today the resistance fight between them, as happened in Afghanistan when the Soviets withdrew. Iraq would then become ungovernable chaotic entity which would take shelter numerous terrorist groups.

If the U.S. occupying forces are lucky, because its opponents in Iraq, after all, are not the Vietcong, it may be that urban armed insurrection to wane as it did with looting at the beginning of the occupation of Iraq. But this does not guarantee that no new test, especially if the U.S. is excessive repression and abruptly insists on transferring sovereignty in Iraq to an interim government today has no legitimacy among the Iraqi people.

Perhaps the only way would be to seek an international departure, calling for United Nations mediation and other countries, including Muslim countries in Iraq to establish an interim government acceptable to all parties, to organize elections no later than next year and thus achieve an honorable solution to this conflict which is becoming politically, as in Vietnam, the mother of all strategic nightmares. Oswaldo de Rivero


New York, March 2004

Friday, May 16, 2008

Gm Lease Pull Ahead 2010 December

The mother of all strategic nightmares.

- The mother of all strategic nightmares ...


TPSIPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC


May 2007 Good Governance
http://buengobiernoperu.com/

IRAQ: The mother of all nightmares Strategic
By: Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero ( Geneva)
May 2007
About four years after President Bush, who celebrated victory in Iraq with his famous phrase "mission accomplished" U.S. casualties rise. At the time passed from 3.300 24 000 dead and wounded. Also, is estimated at 60.000 morethan Iraqi civilians dead lasfuerzas victims of occupation and the insurgency or delterrorismo. The cost of the occupation reached the fabulous rate of a billion dollars a week. Thus, Iraq, costs, today, at about 204 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars. Not then a surprise that most Americans want their country to withdraw from Iraq and Congress have introduced legislation for an exit in August 2008Ahora in almost all the analysis on Iraq raise the specter of Vietnam. Undoubtedly, the analogy with Vietnam if it is only in military terms is wrong because Islamic insurgents and losterroristas Sunnis and Shia militias are not an army under a single command as it was the Vietcong, but on the contrary, they are enemies in full civil war.
Also, unlike Vietnam, the fighting has not carried out in the rain forests but in difficult urban areas where the armed struggle and terrorism cause considerablesbajas civilians. Even less U.S. casualties Iraq are comparable with those of Vietnam. In Iraq, there is an average of two to four American casualties each day add up, while those from Vietnam arrived at 70diarias, rapidly accumulated amount in thousands of lost lives and brought about the massive protest in the United States. While the military analogy with Vietnam may be exaggerated, however it is not the political analogy.
Indeed, in Iraq as in Vietnam, most lapoblación rejects U.S. intervention. Even the political situation in Iraq is more complicated because the United States in Vietnam had large anti-communist allies and the government of Saigon, its military and the Vietnamese bourgeoisie, which are not in Baghdad because the new Iraqi government elected in January 2005, consists of a majority coalition of two Islamic HIIT partidosS ( laRevolución the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq and the Dawa) that are nothing less than allies of Iran and whose political aim is no other, to achieve an Islamic Republic in Iraq. Thus, the U.S. administration to hold elections in Iraq, has made the most incredible political fiascos. Installed in power to a Shiite Muslim majority coalition supported no less by his arch-enemy Iran's Islamic government. When did this election, the influential magazine The New York Review of Book published an article whose title was the epitome of this incredible fiasco. The article sarcastically called "Bush's Islamic Republic."
Today, the project of a Shiite Islamic Republic is supported by Iran and its large protected Moqtada al Sadr with his formidable army the Mhadi Shiite Army with over 60 thousand soldiers. This army will soon become a formidable rival of the U.S. military as it will be difficult for the new Iraqi armed forces, created by the United States, they face the Mhadi Army because they are formed mainly by elements also Shiites and Kurds who are more interested in preserving the current autonomy of Kurdistan to fight Shiites and Sunnis. The additional 21 000 troops sent by President Bush can not stop subversion and urban terrorism and it is likely that Iraq estaviolencia infernal unacruenta becomes protracted civil war that Iraq could build a territory other Shiite and Sunni independent Kurdistancasi. A prolonged civil war in Iraq debesorprendernos. The truth is that Iraq is a country invented by the British in 1921. Nation has never been viable UNESTO but always a territorial entity fraught with ethnic strife between Arabs, Kurds, Assyrians and Turkumanas, and 500 tribes, divided by two major Muslim religious tendencies, the Shiite and Sunni war today.
The apparent national cohesion and t rends all these Muslim ethnic groups was the result of Iraqi governments autocrats who enjoyed a good income with cruelty oil to suppress any attempt at autonomy. Since 1958, the Baathist party and the vicious petro-tyranny of Saddam Housein spending a billion dollars a year suppressing and fighting Kurdish insurgents, shite or both at once.
today's Iraq is no longer a viable state unified by repression but rather an ungovernable chaotic entity (ECI) and will remain so as long as foreign occupation, and while none of the major ethnic and religious groups may prevail in a civil war. Today the United States have no control over Iraq, not on Afghanistan, now become the largest exporter of heroin in the world. It also extended its armed forces suffer from a lack of recruitment. Neither the American superpower has been able to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons enPakistán, India, Iran and North Korea.
Finally, the economy of the United States today accused the most large fiscal and trade deficits in its history, the dollar has weakened and consumer society depends on the purchase of Treasury bonds by Japan, China and other Asia countries yEuropa. This whole situation has undoubtedly Adud on whether the world is as unipolar, as they say. However, despite the severe limits has demonstrated the unilateral action in Iraq and Afghanistan, this should not lead us to think we're in a multipolar world, because no other powers like the United Kingdom, France, Russia China can have unilateral or against global disorder and can not have a balance of military power against the United States.
The truth is that today all the powers are almost powerless against a chaotic, fragmented by civil war, countries collapsed, terrorism, genocide, nuclear proliferation and drug trafficking, weapons and people. Consequently, what exists today is, rather, a great world power deficit to meet the great global challenges of the XXI century. This vacuum of power we would be leading towards a new geopolitical era, where instead of unipolarity or multipolarity, would emergiendouna sort of "apolarity", ie a structure of world power without Sheriff and no multipolar balance of power, which stands the deficit of power of great powers to pacify an increasingly chaotic world and create a new world order.
The Vietnam War, the Soviet invasion deAfganistán, the actual conversion of that country into a narco-state and the Iraq fiasco, show that it is very easy to invade viable nation-states, militarily inferior, but very difficult to deal , to make them viable, democratic and retire honorably when the country has collapsed into a domestic hell. Therefore, the neocon utopia "win the war on terror" building a viable Iraqi democracy that radiates throughout the Middle East has today become the mother of all strategic nightmares.

Orange Brested Starling

The Peru wrapped in the myth of development.

- The Peru wrapped in the myth of development ...


TPISPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC
July 2007


EL PERU'S INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPMENT MYTH
Oswaldo de Rivero
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ eleccion/message/23671
Many believe today that Peru's GDP growth is a sign that the economy has entered a virtuous cycle that leads to development. Growing up is not development, growth based on mineral commodities is less so. Peru has always exported mining products and has never managed to become a developed country. "For now many believe this cyclical boom in mineral prices will lead to development? This cyclical bonanza ores always arises as external factors and external factors also cease. Today depends specifically on the strong international demand, particularly from China, and also of great speculation in world markets.
The history of our underdevelopment is a series of booms and terrible crisis of exports produced by external factors. As were the booms and crises of guano, saltpeter and rubber in the nineteenth century and the boom and bust of the minerals in the twentieth century. In no case shall the temporary booms in commodity prices have reduced poverty in Peru. In contrast, the export of raw materials combined with high population growth, including urban, through more than 180 years of independence, has made poverty in Peru to become hereditary and now affects nearly half of the Peruvian population. Recent reports by the Peruvian Institute of Statistics (INEI) show that the boom in mineral prices and exports has not helped to reduce income inequality and poverty. Since 1991 wages in Peru that were 30% of GDP have fallen to arrive in 2005 to 22.9. So it is not surprising that low wages combined with high rates of unemployment and underemployment rise to a constant social turmoil in Peru and growing emigration.
Indeed, nothing demonstrates more the failure of national development in Peru that the Peruvian tsunami of economic refugees in foreign. No international analyst, academic or private banker seriously consider that Peru is in the process of development, just because its GDP is growing due to primary exports, particularly exports des minerals, which are 60% of them. These specialists come to Peru as a primary economy, traditional, very competitive, embedded in a very poor society, where half the population lives on $ 2 and constant upheaval. Private international analysts, unlike international bureaucracies World Bank and United Nations, considered that the poor are more than half of the population in Peru because they are also poor people, earning 3, 4 and perhaps up to $ 6 a day is not poor, in a global economy, a person with $ 6 a day, 180 per month. What happens is that the international bureaucracy has put extreme poverty bar very low at $ 1 a day and poverty, on $ 2 a day. Therefore, any improvement in this pitiful situation for these technocrats is to overcome poverty, that is when the inhabitants of a country are $ 3 a day (90 dollars a month) are no longer poor!.
Poverty is the consequence of underdevelopment is not the case. Today, the biggest obstacle to development with countries like Peru and Latin America is cultural. Indeed, since independence all these countries have shown a lack of historical vocation of the mathematical, physical, chemical and biological weapons and also for research and development of technologies derived from these sciences, to constantly innovate its domestic production.
As a result of this historical lack of vocation for the natural sciences, American societies America today are real "unscientific cultures, societies where nearly all knowledge and discourse is historical, legal, sociological, economic or literary point where it is preferred that the logarithm, the rhetoric that the experiment, the belief rather than doubt scientific. The result is that almost no programs for Research and Scientific Development (R & D) are those who do, in this era of innovation, the difference between wealth and poverty, between development and underdevelopment, between Asia and Latin America.
countries unscientific trapped in cultures as Latin Americans, are only capable of producing and exporting natural resources and manufactured goods with low technological content, which always have less value than products with high technological content that matters. Consequently, these countries can not accumulate resources to meet their growing demands modernization of urban expansion. In this situation no alternative but to permanently borrow to buy the scientific and technological progress not know how to produce. Thus, the root cause of underdevelopment is not economic but cultural.
Economists have largely ignored the explanations "cultural" development. To economic formulas they just explain the wealth of nations. This simply is not. Empirical experience shows, for example, that a country can practice more radical free-market formulas but still trapped in an unscientific culture will remain a backward society, indebted and poor because they always exported natural resources and products with low technological content have less value than scientific progress that constantly has to import.
Today, only 10% of the world's scientists are in developing countries, 90% of this percentage, is Asia, divided between Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, China and India. These are the only Asian countries that, apart from the United States, Japan and the European Union, reported each year hundreds of patents in the World Industrial Property. Latin America has only 0.7% of scientists from developing countries and not inventing anything. The Asia region is compared with the scientific-technological wasteland. Except for Brazil, no other Latin American country, R & D spending in an amount not even close to 1% of GNP.
In Peru, the investment in scientific and technological research is almost nil. The state spends only 0.03 of GDP, one of the most under-investment in R & D in the region. No society can go in the XXI century, underdevelopment knowledge only restricted to the humanities and social sciences. This knowledge is essential but not sufficient to enter into a true development process. It is for these reasons that humanity enters its third millennium as a dual planetary society divided. On the one hand, a minority of countries that are prosperous effort scientific intellectual, who invent and innovate products and services. The other, a majority of poor countries like Peru and Latin America, which still live physical exertion, exploitation of natural resources and bureaucratic routine work, buying ever more expensive scientific and technological progress can not create.
So to know if a country is "in development" should not be impressed with the GDP growth, fueled by the boom time of primary exports, but to observe if you are graduating more scientists, engineers and technologists, lawyers, scholars, historians, sociologists and psychologists. And above all, check whether the state, enterprises, universities and colleges invest in R & D to continuously innovate the production, as happens today in South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, India, China and Malaysia, which are today only countries that are developing or already developed.
A true sign that in Peru there is a virtuous cycle to development would be the existence of a state strategy to get rid of the trap unscientific culture today that keeps us in underdevelopment. A strategy whose main thrust would be a revolution in education to achieve the same or more graduate scientists and scholars program research and development investments in science and technology to increase the technological content of our production. This signal is occurring in Peru, nor in Latin America where the culture remains firmly unscientific, where exports are still low technological content, where the GNP increases but increases social inequality, where the rich live in a secure haven, the middle class in a purgatory and people in hell,
Oswaldo de Rivero
July 2007

How Much Does Elizabeth Gillies Weigh

Climate change: the threat to international peace and security. Andean

- The new threat to international peace and security ...

TPSIPOL FORUM: RED 08/01/2007 DEMOCRATIC



Le Monde Diplomatique

July 2007


CLIMATE CHANGE: Oswaldo de Rivero
(*)

The New Threat to International Peace and Security



According to Paul Crutzen Nobel prize are not living in the Holocenio which is the current climate period after the Ice Age, but a new era climate created by the same man who should be called the "Antropocenio." According to Crutzen, this was started in 1790 when James Watt perfected his invention, the steam machine, not knowing it would change the planet's climate history. Indeed, the industrial revolution in full swing shot driven by fossil fuels, highly polluting, coal and oil. Since that time, the amount of CO2 has been steadily increasing in the atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect that has overheated the climate of our planet. (1)

The planet has warmed 0.6 degrees Celsius and it has been since 1979 that the hottest years recorded. This is the conclusion of the Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on UN Climate Change (IPCC) that integrates 2.500 specialists from over 100 countries. Today, scientists do not doubt that the warming of Earth's climate is a solid reality and a threat to our civilization (1).

One of the most overheated human activities that climate is the urbanization of the planet replicating unstoppable expansion of cities in California that grow addicted to oil, pouring tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, cement planting on agricultural land and unsustainably consuming more and more water, food and energy. Today, almost every city in the world, especially the new contaminated chaotic megalopolis of Latin America, Asia and the Middle East, expand playing the "California model," thereby adding millions of tons of greenhouse gases already accumulated in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution. (2)

If greenhouse gas emissions continues to accumulate in the atmosphere and climate overheating, hurricanes, cyclones, torrential rains, floods and El Niño, which devastated cities and areas are whole farm, will become even more destructive. Also, an increase in droughts and desertification affecting food production. Also, the glaciers of the Andes and the Himalayas could disappear dangerously diminishing water supply and consequently of food for millions of people. The Arctic, Greenland and parts of Antarctica melting also suffer which could raise the sea level to cover many islands and coasts where most of humanity.

Melting glaciers will collapse
governance
The most dangerous threat to international security posed by Climate change is the increasing scarcity of water. Water is becoming a strategic resource such as oil and the resulting disputes can become violent internal and international conflicts. The capture of water sources and pollution of water reservoirs are now considered as strategic objectives for both military and terrorist groups.

In the two most populous countries, China and India, water scarcity continues to increase due to urban sprawl "California Model." In China more than 400 cities already have water shortages. India not far behind with severe shortages of water for agriculture and cities. In both countries emerging internal disputes about the lack of water and the unsustainable urban sprawl on agricultural land. Undoubtedly, this situation will worsen when you go disappearing glaciers of the Himalayas and lack of water in the Yellow and Yangtze rivers large in China and Brahmaputra, Ganges in India

How can these two mega-states to overcome the huge problem of the decrease of water resources from its explosive development. Nobody knows. What is certain is that if you decrease the flow of the great rivers of China and India for the shrinkage of glaciers in the Himalayas, we face a huge ecological disaster that will cause serious problems governance in two behemoths that represents a quarter of humanity have nuclear weapons.

not only glaciers in the Himalayas are disappearing, so are making the glaciers of the Andes at a rapid pace, experts may disappear between 15 and 25 years, leaving large cities and agricultural areas of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru without water and thus putting at risk access to food for most of the population is poor. This scarcity of vital resources for survival create more social unrest, increase existing violent conflicts and create new ones, further affecting the governance of the Andean states. (3)

Also, water scarcity can become the current disputes over the use of large flows of international rivers in conflicts between nations. The flow of Tigre and Euphrates rivers being dammed by Turkey to irrigate the region of Anatolia, are also vital to the survival of Iraq and Syria. If there is a tripartite agreement on its use, it is not strange as it may generate a conflict in the future. (4) For Israel, Syria, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, the distribution and use of the Jordan River, so far not well defined, are without doubt the fundamental condition for the existence of a lasting peace between them. You can also arise a conflict by the use of Nile water between Egypt and Ethiopia, due to damming it plans to make this country last part of the flow of this river that is vital to Egypt since Pharaonic times.

land to agricultural use per-capita in the world has declined. All soils, even the richest and the United States are the granaries of the world today suffer degradation. According to the World Bank in 80 developing countries food production has declined. This situation will worsen further with hydrological disasters of climate change. Food, particularly grains, will thus become more scarce and expensive, further affecting the food-importing countries, particularly countries that already suffers from erosion, drought and desertification as the Sahael, Margreb, the Andes, Central Asia, China and India. (5)

Within this context of hydrological disasters, shortages and rising food prices, they may become effective diplomatic weapon that would use the major exporting countries to assert their national interests. Many poor countries are at the mercy of food aid will be a kind of beggars states will suffer food crisis and infighting that will become ungovernable.

Ecology is linked to violence

Professor Homer-Dixon has done perhaps the most thorough studies on the link between environmental degradation and violence, sees the emergence of Sendero Luminoso in Ayacucho region, not only due to reasons ideological but also to ecological factors, because before the outbreak of the subversion, the density of the Ayacucho population grew significantly to reach 12.1 inhabitants per km2 while agricultural land decreased to 0.2 hectares per person. This made the per capita income fell, and thus access to sufficient food. According to this specialist, also increased population density and limited agriculture were factors of the insurgency in sheets, Pakistan, Philippines, South Africa and now in Darfur (Sudan) (6)

The impact of climate change on international security are clearly visible when the Program Environment UN says that in the year 2010, environmental refugees could, no less, to reach 50 million as a result of the increased intensity of hydrological disasters. National Geographic also announces consequences that would change the geopolitical map of the world. According to this magazine if Greenland continues to melt as quickly, the sea level could go up up to three meters in 2100. This increase will eliminate flooding islands and coastlines severely important as Florida, Holland and the great deltas of the Nile, Ganges and Brahmaputra, causing massive population movements into neighboring regions also populated, thereby giving rise to conflicts.

most fragile countries address climate change and more likely to suffer serious social and political turmoil are those who are now the highest in the world urban population growth combined with the lowest per-capita consumption of water and food world. These countries are: Afghanistan, Angola, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Burundi, Cameroon, North Korea, Cote d'Ivoire, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Jordan, Kenya, Liberia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, PERU, Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda , Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe. This group must be added the 46 countries that are islands threatened by rising sea levels.

This large number of countries, representing billions of people, whose viability as urban societies is threatened by climate change confirms that this emerging link between environmental degradation and internal and international turmoil. For these reasons, when I was Ambassador of Peru to the United Nations, initiate coordination with colleagues from countries that are ecologically fragile, especially with the ambassadors of the island states to get them to give the highest consideration to climate change as a new threat to peace and security.

This coordination of interests between Peru and threatened by the loss of glaciers and island states threatened by rising oceans, was instrumental in achieving the number of votes needed to gain entry of Peru to the Security Council. Once in the Council's intention was to request that the supreme organ of the international security debated for the first time open publicly and climate change. My mission at the United Nations term before he could complete the steps to introduce this important issue in the Security Council. However, the income subject thanks to the leadership of Great Britain, thus giving a valuable step in establishing a link between climate change and international security.

Not only the Security Council has begun to recognize the relationship between climate change and international security, but also an important study, no less, that the Pentagon entitled "Climate Change and National Security of the United States" has recognized that acute water shortage and large drought that climate change will affect food production and will cause considerable tension and national and international conflicts. Recently also eleven admirals and generals of the United States issued a report stating that climate change is a threat multiplier to international security. Today, climate change has become a parameter of analysis of international security

Throughout the twentieth century, the growth parameter was hegemonic to predict the fate of nations and the world today but this parameter is not valid For all the economic thought of the last century has is based on the premise that the planet has the capacity to give us perpetual economic growth. This premise is now a fallacy that has no relation to the ecological reality of the Earth. From this century, to learn the fate of the world will become increasingly necessary to replace the economic forecasts for ecological forecasting. In other words, replace the mythology of economic growth data of predation planetary scientists.

Geneva, July 2007.


(1) The New York Times. May 9, 2005
(2) Oswaldo de Rivero. The Myth of Development p. 233. Lima 2006
FEC (3) France Press.7 August 2005
(4) Le Dessous de Cartes. 206 p. Editor Taillandier. Paris 2006
(5) Ibid p. 220
(6) Thomas F. Homer Dixon. Enviroment, Scarcity and Violence. Princeton University Press 1999
(7) Oswaldo de Rivero. Op cit. P. 286

* Ambassador, former representation before the UN Security Council.

Vintage Cazal 856 S Replica

comunity of Nations and the UN reform.

- 1. Andean Comunity of Nations (CAN) express STI viewpoints on the United Nations Reform to the General Assembly, Represented by Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero ..


TPSIPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC


1 April 2005. Andean Comunity of Nations (CAN) express viewpoints on the STI United Nations Reform to the General Assembly
http://www.comunidadandina.org/ingles/press/np6-4-05.htm
En castellano :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/20049

- The mith of Development
http://www.sudnordnews.org/libriver.html
http://law.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/jspl/2003%20Volume7Number1/deriv

2. Reform of the United Nations Security Council and role of Latin America

3. Arts relacionados :
- World Public opinion on UN
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/23726

- Are Diplomats necessary
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/24497


1. Andean Comunity of Nations expresses its viewpoints on the United Nations reform to the General Assembly


Lima, April 6, 2005.- Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero, Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations, made a presentation this morning in New York, on behalf of the five Andean Community Member Countries, with regard to the report of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan entitled "In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all.”
This is the first time the CAN took the floor at a United Nations General Assembly session to speak out about the reform of the organization and the proposals put forward for that purpose in the cited report.

The Andean Community started off by expressing its willingness to firmly support the strengthening of the United Nations in order to increase its efficiency and effectiveness in promoting the development and safety of all and respect for international law. It also maintained that the new concept of international collective security should address both new and old threats, “above all the fight against poverty and social exclusion.”

It also pointed out that the decisions that are adopted in the evaluation of compliance with the Millennium Declaration targets and the United Nations reform “should lead to balanced results that address the interests of all Member States” and, for that reason, proposed that they should not be adopted as a “package.”

The CAN also expressed its strong backing for multilateralism and its concern over the lack of attention being given to countries which, although “middle income,” show high poverty rates. It requested that urgent attention be given to a series of problems faced by these countries, such as external debt, poverty, recurring economic crises, and instability.

Ambassador De Rivero also stated, on behalf of the CAN, that the review process of the Millennium Declaration and the United Nations reform should contribute toward overcoming the inequitable elements of the international trade system by eliminating subsidies imposed and tariff and para-tariff barriers raised by developed countries “that keep us from building up our national productive capacities.”

To conclude, the Andean countries considered that a long-term development strategy should aim at creating wealth by promoting the existence of a favorable international environment for development.

It should be added here that the United Nations General Assembly, with its adoption of Resolution 52/6 of November 1997, gave the Andean Community observer status, authorizing it to participate in the sessions and efforts of that body.

The presentation made by Ambassador De Rivero, in representation of the Andean Community, is positive proof that joint positions can be coordinated in the framework of the Andean Common Foreign Policy, whose guidelines were approved in 1999 through Decision 458, making it possible to strengthen the profile and influence of the CAN member countries on the dynamic international stage.

2. Statement by the Andean CommunityReport of the Secretary-General “In larger freedom: Towards security, development and human rights for all” General Assembly of the United NationsBy PERUVIAN Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero, Permanent Representative to the United Nations, on behalf of the Andean Community
New York, April 6, 2005

Mister President:
Allow me to address this session on behalf of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Peru, Member States of the Andean Community, a region with 120 million inhabitants.

Created almost 36 years ago, the Andean Community is the oldest and most institutionalized tool for integration in South America. It is the modern expression of an Andean identity built on the basis of common geography, history and interests with a common foreign policy, the core of the integration of the South American Community of Nations.
Mr. President:
The Andean countries, founding members of the United Nations, have reviewed the Report of the Secretary-General entitled: “In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all”. We are currently analyzing with a high interest the proposals contained thereof and we commit to participating actively and collectively in the consultation and negotiation processes aimed at the strengthening of the United Nations and its efficiency in promoting development and security for all as well as the compliance with international law.
In this opportunity, only general observations will be raised. We will present specific suggestions in future consultations and negotiations.

We share the need for a new concept of an international collective security that embraces both old and new threats, particularly those related to the struggle against poverty and social exclusion. We also support the idea that development, security, freedom and protection of human rights are closely related.

A first reflection is derived from the fact that the proposals of this document constitute a “package”, that is, the concept of “single undertaking”. However, the variety of the issues covered by the Report gives them a specific value which demands separated considerations. Therefore, our countries consider that the decisions to be adopted in the process of evaluation of the implementation of the Millennium Declaration and the reform of the United Nations must lead to balanced results that enable the fulfillment of the interests of all Member States.

The Andean countries fully support multilateralism as a means of improving and strengthening the capacity of Member States to meet the needs of their populations individually or collectively, and to comply with international commitments taken voluntarily, strengthening in this way, the agreed international regimes.

Mr. President:
It is with concern that we observe that the Secretary-General pays little attention to countries such as those of the Andean region which, in spite of their struggle to reach a level of average income, still maintain high levels of poverty. If this issue is not addressed properly, their income levels could revert and the Millennium Development Goals would be even more difficult to achieve.

Foreign debt, poverty, recurrent economic crises and social instability are serious issues that require an urgent solution. The path towards development and the reform of the United Nations system must take into account the situation of every State and region.

We are confident that the reform of the United Nations and the review of the Millennium Declaration goals, which include that of the system for the promotion of development will contribute to eliminate the existing inequality in the international trading system through the elimination of subsidies and tariff barriers of developed countries that hamper the strengthening of our national productive capacity. Likewise, actions are necessary to avoid the volatility of capital flows, the high vulnerability and the high levels of foreign indebtedness as well as an international regime for intellectual property that allows the transfer of technology and the participation of developing countries in the world’s decision making.

Breton Woods Institutions and the World Trade Organization should adjust themselves to the United Nations system and to the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals to face the current social deficit of globalization, which impedes the generation of employment and creates instability.

These are all very important issues that must have a specific place in the eighth goal of the Millennium Declaration targeted to “developing a global partnership for development”. A clear commitment should be made to favor a special and differential treatment in trade issues, stronger actions in the fields of science, technology and innovation and an adequate international solution for the problem of foreign debt in our economies as well as a clear acknowledgement to the need of new financial mechanisms at the international level to strengthen efficiency of public policies and democracies.

The Report of the Secretary-General acknowledges that globalization has contributed to social inequality. Inequality caused by globalization undermines political security. In practice, economic and social rights as well as the right to development will be hampered, and with this, the validity of political rights and democracy itself.

For Andean countries, eradication of poverty is a very important issue and a part of their national strategies. This is why they contribute tirelessly in the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals. However, we consider that a strategy for development in the long run must aim at the creation of wealth through the promotion of an international environment favorable for development. From the Secretary-General’s Report some bias can be observed in assistance issues. We hope that future debates to review the application of the Monterrey Consensus help us strengthen our proposals in the areas of development, including accountability to multinational enterprises.

Mr. President:
Allow me to conclude by conveying the firm belief of the Andean countries in the protection of the fundamental rights of men and women, the human dignity and value, gender equality and the consolidation of democracy. As Member States of the South American Community of Nations, the Rio Group, the Group of 77, the Non-Aligned Movement and the Andean Community, we will seek for the 2005 Summit to achieve the goal of creating conditions for all countries to live in peace, security and prosperity.
Thank you.

Contexto

Intervención Andean Community on the Report of the Secretary General of the United Nations entitled "In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all"

Statement by Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero, Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations , on behalf of the Andean Community
------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------
New York, April 6 2005
Mr President,
am speaking in this session on behalf of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Peru, countries of the Andean Community to meet 120 million people.
The Andean Community established nearly 36 years, is the oldest integration process and institutionalized in South America. It is the contemporary expression of an Andean identity built on the basis of geography, history and common interests that are expressed in an agreed common foreign policy, which is the core of the Bolivarian integration of the South American Community of Nations.
Mr President,
Andean countries, founding members of the United Nations, have examined the report of the Secretary-General: "In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all. " We are looking with great interest the proposals contained in this document and pledge to participate actively and collectively in the process of consultations and negotiations leading to strengthening the United Nations and enhancing its efficiency and effectiveness in promoting development and security of all and respect for international law.
is appropriate to comment in general, with a commitment to provide specific suggestions in the upcoming consultations and negotiations.
share the need for a new concept of international collective security that addresses threats new and old, especially the fight against poverty and social exclusion, and that development, security and freedom and protection of human rights are closely interrelated.
A first consideration is clear from the suggestion that the proposals received are a "package", which involves the notion of "single undertaking". However, we can not help noticing that the heterogeneity of the issues addressed in the various chapters of the report makes each of them has a specific value that requires separate considerations. Accordingly, our countries believe that the decisions taken in the process of assessing compliance with the Millennium Declaration and UN reform should lead to balanced results that serve the interests of all Member States.
Secondly, the Andean countries strongly support multilateralism because it improves and strengthens the ability of States individually or collectively, so they can meet the needs of their people and meet the international obligations they have freely , agreed to strengthen international regimes.
Mr President,
We are concerned that the Report of the Secretary-General pays little attention to countries such as the Andean countries, have been hard-won income levels average income but poverty levels remain high. If not treated properly this situation, our country could reverse these levels of income which would hardly achieve the millennium development goals.
urgently require attention to the serious problems facing middle-income states, such as external debt, poverty is the number, greater than that of other States, the recurrent economic crises and instability. The path to development and reform of the United Nations system should be considered in due proportion and comprehensively the situation of various states and regions.
We have expectations that the review of the Millennium Declaration and the process of UN reform, among which is the promotion system for development, helps to overcome the existing inequality in the international trading system by eliminating subsidies, tariff barriers and tariffs in developed countries that impede the strengthening of our national productive capacity. Similarly, it is necessary to take decisive action to counter the volatility of capital flows, high external vulnerability and high levels of external indebtedness. Also achieve an international intellectual property regime that does not put the brakes on technology transfer and the participation of developing countries in global economic decision making.

Bretton Woods institutions and World Trade Organization must adapt to the United Nations system and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals to address current social deficit of globalization that impedes employment and creates instability.

All these issues are very important and should occupy a specific place in the eighth Millennium Development Goal aimed to "promote a global partnership for development. " There should be a clear commitment to special and differential treatment in trade, stronger action in science, technology and innovation, an appropriate international solution to the external debt burden on our economies, and a clear recognition of need for new international financial mechanisms to strengthen the efficiency and effectiveness of public policy and democracy in the country.
The Report of the Secretary-General recognizes that globalization has increased social inequality. If unchecked inequality that globalization is causing the current policy no security. Be prevented in practice the effect of economic and social rights of peoples, the right to development and thus, the validity of political rights and democracy itself.

Andean countries to eradicate poverty is extremely important and is part of its national strategy, therefore contributing to the higher of its efforts on achieving the millennium development goals. However, we believe that a strategy of long-term development must aim to create wealth through the promotion of a favorable international environment for development. We see in the Report of the Secretary General some bias welfare and we hope that future discussions to review implementing the Monterrey Consensus help us strengthen the set of proposals in the field of development, including the responsibility that lies with the multinationals.

Finally, Mr. President, I would have the Andean countries strongly believe in upholding the fundamental rights of men and women, their dignity and value, gender equality and the consolidation of democracy. As members of the South American Community of Nations, the Rio Group, the Group of 77, the Non-Aligned Movement and of course as the Andean Community, we will seek the 2005 summit meeting with the task of creating the conditions for all countries can live in peace, security and prosperity.
Thank
--------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
2. The Wilson Center

Reform of the United Nations Security Council and the Role of Latin America
Return to Event List
April 18 2005, 3:00 pm - 5:30 pm Event Summary

Panelists: Madeleine Albright, Former Secretary of State and former U.S. ambassador to the UNEmilio Cardenas, Former Ambassador to the UN from ArgentinaHeraldo Muñoz, Ambassador to the UN from ChileOn April 18, 2005 the Woodrow Wilson Center convened a panel of former and current ambassadors to the United Nations to discuss the recently rekindled topic of UN reform and how Latin America fits in the process. Joseph Tulchin, Director of the Latin American Program, and David Birenbaum, a senior policy scholar at the center, gave the welcoming remarks and introduced the panelists. [Birenbaum is a former US ambassador to the UN under UN Management and Reform, and is currently conducting a study on UN reform.]Madeleine Albright outlined a web of factors which defines the context of UN Security Council reform today. She touched on the United States’ reputation as the member country that is quick to push for reform, yet quite slow in paying its dues. Reformers in 1993 as well as today have been presented with the primary task of making the Security Council more representative of today’s global power structure. However, this proves an extremely difficult undertaking because the process gets flooded with candidates for permanent seats and veto power.
In addition to this, said Albright, intricate alliances form during the negotiations, each conditioning their vote on different, often contradicting propositions. This happens on top of pre-existing alliances from strategic caucuses to major regional organizations such as the European Union. Emilio Cárdenas started with the point that UN reform reaches far beyond the Security Council to other organs such as the General Assembly, and comprehensive reform may call for amending the UN Charter. Cárdenas recognizes UN reform as a process starting about 12 years ago with what he referred to as the “quick fix” of granting Germany and Japan permanent seats. He highlighted the paradox that these two countries, considered the enemy in the Charter, are now the second and third largest contributors to the UN.
However, the “quick fix” was not approved because too many countries conditioned support on their own membership. Shifting the focus to Latin America, Cárdenas observed that some countries, including Mexico, have no desire for a permanent seat on the Council, and that Brazil is the only one that has expressly campaigned for a seat. On motives for Latin American countries to seek a permanent seat, he included greater access to the world’s powerful countries, a “cascade effect” of permanent members winning board membership at UN agencies, and status as the representative of the region. Reflecting on his days as permanent representative to the UN, he said that Argentina did not seek permanent status because its government did not think that reform would ever materialize, and at the time it was right. Even today, Cárdenas believes it is unrealistic to expect reform to be completed by the end of this year, as the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, has called for.
Finally, Cárdenas warned of the potentially dangerous economic and global security consequences in the recent diplomatic flare-up between China and Japan. Heraldo Muñoz listed several factors which may contribute to a higher probability for Security Council reform today, including gobal power shifts, the oil-for-food scandal, and the war in Iraq. On this last point, he noted that despite going around the Security Council before the war, the US still came back for cooperation with the interim government, construction of infrastructure, and the Iraqi national elections. Also, while the near guarantee of East-West vetoes during the Cold War tended to leave the Security Council in a stagnant state which shifted decisions to the General Assembly, resolutions and other activities have significantly increased since the early 1990s, and today the Security Council enjoys a renewed relevance. Trends like these mean that everyone benefits from a vibrant, effective UN, the main piece of which is the Security Council. Muñoz similarly noted a problem of too many candidates. The reform proposal which calls for one representative for “the Americas”, as opposed to 2 each for Asia and Africa, also poses a significant disadvantage for Latin America. Criteria for membership is far from clear, but may include GNP, GNP per capita, financial and other resource contributions, and general diplomatic initiatives. Muñoz agreed with the point that complete UN reform requires many changes beyond the Security Council, including measures to depoliticize the Human Rights Commission, clarify guidelines for the legitimate use of force, and broaden the role of post-conflict reconstruction.
In closing, Muñoz called for a “New Deal” at the United Nations, consisting of inclusive reform that would benefit even those nations with no prospects of a permanent seat on the Security Council. Birenbaum then opened up the discussion to questions. When asked about new criteria for the use of force, Albright responded that this would be helpful, while noting that the Security Council already has the ability to act preventively in various alternative ways, including by force. A major obstacle to consensus would be a clear definition of terrorism. In addition, Albright also believes that a peace-building commission with a strong enough mandate could potentially have many volunteers. Cárdenas stated that he did not think the United States was ready for Security Council reform, including any delineation of use of force criteria, and that to push the US would effectively kill the window of opportunity. The only answer to this dilemma would be to call for more time. Cárdenas added that the Human Rights Commission is a shame to us in its current state, but that efforts towards democratization should spread beyond the commission to all organs of the United Nations.
Written by Joseph Tulchin with help from Alana Parker
Brazil Confident Its Suggestion for UN Reform Will Win



Written by Bruno Bocchini
Sunday, 26 June 2005
The Brazilian government is confident that the project proposed by the G4 (a group of countries formed by Brazil, Germany, Japan, and India) for reforming the UN Security Council will be approved.

"We are confident we will have a large majority in favor of this text," said Ambassador José Vallim Guerreiro, of the Ministry of Foreign Relations' Department of International Organs.
The G4 proposal calls for the inclusion of six additional countries as permanent members of the Council: two African countries (still to be determined) and the four members of the G4.
It also suggests expanding the number of temporary Council members from 10 to 14. The Council is currently composed of five permanent members (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China) and ten temporary members, for a total of 15 countries.
The chief task of the UN Security Council is to maintain world peace and security. Among its other powers, the Council can authorize the use of force to settle controversies between countries.

All of the Council's decisions must be approved by at least 9 of its 15 members. A negative vote by just one of its permanent members, however, is sufficient to defeat a motion.
In the G4 proposal, the new permanent members would renounce this veto power for 15 years. At the end of this period, a new round of negotiations would be initiated to reconsider the question.

In order for the G4 proposal to be adopted, the text must first receive ayes from two-thirds of the 192 member countries of the UN General Assembly, that is, 128 votes in favor. This vote, according to Ambassador Guerreiro, should take place in July.

If the Assembly approves the new Security Council model, with its new members, the G4 proposal will be transformed into an amendment to the UN Charter.
But, for the Charter to be altered, the amendment must be approved by the parliaments of two-thirds of the member countries of the General Assembly and the parliaments of all the permanent members of the Security Council.

According to Ambassador Guerreiro, among the five permanent members of the Security Council, the G4 proposal has the support of France, and there are indications that the United Kingdom and Russia might back it.

UN Security Council Reform: A Challenge for the South Global Dialogue
Volume3.3
December 1998

Developing countries have argued that the structure of the Security Council is anachronistic and unreflective of the current realities of the post-cold war world. Their proposals for its reform, however, have not been met with enthusiasm by the G7.
SHANNON FIELD argues that South Africa, as chair of the Non-Aligned Movement for the next three years, should unite Southern countries on this issue. Only then can the Movement fully utilise its leverage in the United Nations to bring about Security Council reform.
The subject of United Nations (UN) reform has attracted increased attention over the past year, following UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's proposals for the reform of what is seen as a beleaguered organisation. The issue of UN reform featured at the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit held in Durban in September and is likely to remain prominent on the NAM agenda over the next three years, with South Africa as NAM chair.
Kofi Annan's reform proposals have focused on the UN Secretariat, calling for administrative changes to improve the functioning of the UN system. This is in line with the agenda of powerful Northern countries that seek to downsize UN operations and eliminate bureaucratic waste. The United States, in particular, has been able to ensure that administrative reform takes place by using the financial whip and withholding its dues to the organisation, which amounts to almost 80 per cent of the total arrears owed to the organisation.
While many of these measures are necessary to enhance the effectiveness of UN operations, larger issues of UN reform such as the democratisation of certain UN structures have not been adequately addressed by recent reform initiatives. It is developing countries that tend to be more concerned with substantive reform like the restructuring of the Security Council. The reform of the Security Council is crucial given its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It is clearly not a priority for the permanent members of the Security Council - the US, UK, France, Russia, and China - to agitate for the democratisation of this body, which would only see their power reduced.
There is currently a consensus among the developing countries that the structure of the Security Council is anachronistic and unreflective of the current realities of the post-cold war world. Developing countries now make up more than two-thirds of the total UN membership, but are grossly underrepresented on the Security Council. This can be explained by the fact that many did not exist as sovereign independent states at the time the organisation was founded.
Some in the developed world would rebut the arguments of developing countries. They claim that the Security Council was never designed to represent the UN membership geographically, but was intended to be a concert of great powers who had the right to make major decisions by virtue of the fact that they held economic and military power. However, greater representation of developing countries on the Council is now more important than ever, considering the frequent intervention of the UN in conflicts occurring within the South. The more representative the Council, the more legitimate its actions will seem and the easier it will be to build consensus and have its actions carried out.
Perspectives on Security Council reform

While it is generally accepted that the Council should be enlarged to make it more representative, the United States, France, Britain and Russia are opposed to any enlargement that will bring its total number to over 23 members. The United States insists that Germany and Japan should be included among the new permanent members, as they are both the world's second and third largest economies and UN dues payers, thus giving them the right to greater influence. Permanent members have not stated clear objections to the extension of veto power to new permanent members, but oppose any limitation of the veto power.

The Organisation of African Unity (OAU) has argued for an expansion of the Security Council to bring its total number to no less than 26 members. According to the OAU proposal, Africa should have at least two permanent rotational Security Council seats and five non-permanent seats. The representatives for the permanent seats would be nominated by the region and elected by the General Assembly. The OAU has stipulated that limitations be placed on veto use.
NAM pronouncements on Security Council expansion have been noticeably vague. The Movement argues for an increase in membership by no less than 11 states but does not specify to which regions these seats should be allocated. South Africa has officially supported the OAU position to expand the Security Council to 26 members and create a rotational seat system. Its position on the veto power has been that the veto should either be abolished in a new Security Council or extended to incoming members.
Recommendations for a restructured Security Council
As chair of the NAM South Africa will have the opportunity to present a detailed and clearly defined position on the reform of the Security Council to the South and attempt to rally developing countries behind a common proposal. To truly democratise the Council South Africa would need to advocate for the elimination of all permanent seats and the creation of regional seats elected by the General Assembly, although this would not be acceptable to the existing permanent members. It is recommended that South Africa adopt the following position on
Security Council reform:
Expand the Security Council to a total of 26 members, broken down as follows: Existing permanent members
United States
Russia
China
Britain
France Additional permanent members
African seat
African seat
Asian seat
Latin American seat
Industrialised country seatExisting non-permanent members
Asian seat
Asian seat
African seat
African seat
African seat
Latin American seat
Latin American seat
Eastern European seat
Western Europe and others
Western Europe and othersAdditional non-permanent members
African seat
African seat
Asian seat
Asian seat
Latin American seat
Arab seat
The permanent African seats should be rotating, enabling a number of key African states to exercise their influence and share the cost of permanent member status. Asia and Latin America can decide as regions whether or not their permanent seats should be rotational.
One permanent seat should be reserved for industrialised countries enabling states such as Germany, Japan, Canada, Italy and Sweden to contend.
Veto power should be extended to incoming permanent members and its use limited to actions taken under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
Countering objections

The viability of such a position on Security Council reform may be challenged on a number of fronts. One foreseeable objection may be to the recommendation for rotational regional seats. Rotational seats may be seen as discriminatory by some in the South when powerful Northern states are guaranteed consistent influence as existing permanent members. While a rotational seat system for incoming members is discriminatory there is little hope that the existing permanent members would forego some of their power in order to create regional seats across the board. Regional hegemons like Brazil and India have already stated their objections to a rotational seat system. This is problematic given that other powers such as Argentina, Mexico, Pakistan and Indonesia insist on this system. Developing consensus within the South will require compromise between these positions.

It is also questionable whether African countries have the financial resources to assume permanent status, even within a rotational system. While it is true that the majority of African states would have difficulty mobilising the resources for such a position, key African states like Zimbabwe, South Africa, Kenya, Tunisia, and Nigeria claim the ability to assume such responsibility. Within South Africa skeptics have challenged the wisdom of diverting much needed resources from development projects to finance a term for South Africa on the Security Council in the permanent category.
The additional costs of permanent status are not significant in real terms, however, especially given the opportunity for South Africa to become a truly influential international actor. According to the South African department of foreign affairs, South Africa's contribution to the United Nations is currently about R16m a year, and permanent member status would only involve a one to five percent increase in this amount. A rotational system might also impede the ability of permanent members to develop fully the necessary structures and mechanisms within their own governing system to engage with the Security Council before their term expires.

In addition to objections concerning the viability of rotational seat system, there could possibly be opposition to the argument for extending the veto power to new members, even with stringent limitations. The point that has been made in the past is that a proliferation of veto holders would paralyse decision-making in the Council by doubling the number of potential nay-sayers and making it difficult for the Council to act promptly and effectively. This potential problem could be resolved by increasing the number of vetoes necessary to block the adoption of a resolution to a minimum of two. The existing permanent members will oppose the curtailment of veto power but will have a hard time ignoring the demands of the overwhelming majority of the General Assembly, of whom more than 95 per cent support future restrictions on the use of the veto.

Another challenge to the position outlined here is American professor Craig Murphy's argument that the ambivalence and disunity of the Group of 7 assures that no more than piecemeal UN reforms are likely in the near future. Murphy has pointed to France and Britain's disinterest in changing the current system of Council membership as it will diminish their influence, as well as the lack of political will on the part of the Canadian and Italian governments to use their influence to ensure substantive UN reform. As for the United States (US), Murphy contends that the conservative nature of the US congress and the distrust of many Republicans of the UN system will lead American policy-makers to block any efforts to empower developing countries. He also characterises Japan and Germany as distracted supporters of fundamental UN reform - Japan due to its growing regional focus and Germany due to its preoccupation with economic and environmental issues. The conclusion therefore is that if the G7 are indifferent, then fundamental reform is unlikely.

This defeatist line of argument does not take into account the power of developing countries as a bloc to bring about change. The NAM consists of 114 developing countries, which makes up almost two-thirds of the General Assembly, and its power to influence UN reform should not be underestimated. The UN Secretary General has publicly recognised the importance of positions taken by NAM, suggesting that objections held by NAM members as a whole would probably prevent certain proposals from being realised. Kofi Annan specifically referred to the objection of NAM members to the provision of a permanent seat to Germany and was of the view that their objection made German inclusion unlikely.
The way forward

The prospects of the above proposal for substantive UN reform being accepted by two-thirds of the General Assembly and the five existing permanent members will largely depend on the political will of Southern countries to compromise and agree on a common position. NAM has proved to be a house divided in the past on many issues but the challenge to South Africa as it heads the organisation over the next three years will be to unite the South. One way in which South Africa can hope to achieve this would be to reach out to civil society organisations within the South, many of which are pro-UN reform, in an effort to get them to influence the views of their governments. It does not seem unrealistic to expect that consensus among developing countries on UN reform can be achieved by the year 2001. Policy-makers should not lose sight of the fact that UN reform of the kind discussed here has enormous ramifications for the future of developing countries.

Shannon L Field was an FGD researcher and is presently working for Canada's Parliamentary Centre for Foreign Affairs in Ottawa.

How To Fold A Proform Treadmill

United Nations: reform impossible.

- Naciones Unidas, la reforma imposible...


FORUM TPSIPOL : RED DEMOCRATICA
Enero 2005


Contexto

Naciones Unidas: la reforma imposible
Oswaldo de Rivero

A year ago it occurred Kofi Anann UN reform and appointed a High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change to submit recommendations. More than a month this Panel submitted its report to the sublime title "A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility
."

This report focuses mainly on reform of the UN collective security. Within this context, it makes a good assessment of threats to international security XXI century, qualifying as a threat to poverty, global infectious diseases, environmental degradation, climate change, terrorism, proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, global crime and national non-viability.

An interesting contribution in this diagnosis is to have recognized as a threat, something that was once taboo, namely that developing countries can become viable, developing, as the report says, in "Stress States" and also "failed states." This diagnosis is very similar to the points in my book "The Myth of Development" when, speaking of national infeasibility, established two categories: "The" viable national economies "(Stress States) and" ungovernable chaotic entities "(failed states. Thus, the possibility of national infeasibility, which many believed was an exaggeration is now recognized as fact by the High Level Panel convened by the Secretary General.
While threats to international security are well identified, the remedy proposed by the Report of the High Level Panel to address these threats is unrealistic, because it is no less, which established a new consensus on international security. is so easy.

This recommendation assumes that all states reach a common strategic vision of the threats. The truth is that a common strategic perception existed only briefly in 1991 during the first Gulf War, when America led to the endorsement of the Security Council, a large global coalition to evict Iraq from Kuwait. However, this consensus did not last long, some time, the United States and NATO used military force unilaterally to bomb Serbia and intervene in Kosovo without Security Council endorsement, for fear that Russia and China to veto the use of force against Serbia.

Today the gap to a consensus on international security has expanded much more, not only between the United States, Russia and China, but also with France, Germany and other middle powers, then the States' unilateral attack united Iraq, followed by the appalling violence and resistance to occupation, the torture at Abu Ghraib and the removal of the Geneva Conventions to the Guantanamo case and also with the different approaches that exist to do against Iran.

addition to non-convergent strategic visions there is another important strategic factor that allows building a new security consensus international. This factor is the lack of world power with both the American superpower, like all the other great powers to restore order in the world. Indeed, today no nation-state, however powerful, can today only, addressing terrorism, nuclear proliferation, to global crime, climate change, poverty, civil wars and genocides and massive violations of human rights.

Today, if you have a realistic view of world power, the concept of unipolarity deserves to be reviewed. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, has released an image, more journalistic than real, of a United States omnipotent and imperial. In reality there has been neither omnipotent nor Empire only so far a short period of unipolarity, which ended when the United States returned to the Security Council calling for multilateral support to relieve the hell of the occupation of Iraq. Rather, what happened after Iraq, has been an erosion of U.S. global strategic power due to over extension of the voluntary armed forces do not recruit as before and the increased danger of his mega budget deficit and current account has fact that the dollar is devalued significantly.
today All these facts prove the limits of American unilateral power. The power in the world today is unipolar. The United States remains a superpower, but its unilateral action has serious limitations. As stated by Professor Samuel Huntington, the United States can not act alone today as a Sheriff and impose a Pax Americana. Also with good reason, the leading international security specialist Z. Brzezinski says, "Do not confuse dominance with omnipotence."

This deficit of American power should not lead us to move from a unipolar to a utopia utopia multipolar because France, Germany, Japan, Russia, China or India do not have power enough to have a multipolar balance of power against the superpower U.S.. Today, instead of unipolarity or multipolarity, so there is a great shortage of world power, a kind of apolarity that makes all the big powers for their inability to shine in front of a chaotic and fragmented by poverty, civil wars, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, drug trafficking, people and arms. All this also makes it very difficult for strategic convergence exists to reach a new consensus on international security.

Against this chaotic world full of threats, the report of the High Level Panel recommended that the self-defense is framed, as established in Article 51 of the Charter is ie that only self-defense exercises after an armed attack occurs. However, he admits that the State can defend threatened with the use of preventive force against him when an attack is "imminent" or "obvious." However, the threatened state has to prove to the Security Council, the imminence or evidence that the attack will occur. In other words, there may be preventive use of force if authorized by the Security Council would otherwise be an illegal use of force.

This is a new interpretation of what is meant by self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter, since according to this article only can exercise the right of self-defense after an armed attack occurs, not before. That is the article denying any possibility of a preventive self-defense. Now, with this new interpretation may allow pre-emptive strike, but only on condition of being authorized or endorsed by the Security Council.

This new concept of anticipatory self-defense authorized by the Security Council did not place anyone. On the one hand, the United States who want to always have the possibility of a quick preventive self-defense against terrorism or nuclear proliferation, very unlikely to engage in Council Security for permission to use force, proving that there is an imminent or obvious. Long before this report came out during the election campaign, both President Bush and his opponent Kerry, declared repeatedly that never seek permission to defend the American people.

On the other hand, it is also possible that the other major powers do not look with favor this test, before the Security Council, the imminence or evidence for use of force. Almost all great powers, but did not proclaim a doctrine, have strategic vision, which in one way or another, considered a potential intervention in their areas of influence or dispute, invoking self-defense Finally, a large majority of non-aligned countries believe that the imminence or the evidence is only a pretext to enable effective preventive intervention against them. The truth is that the High Level Panel, with its lack of realpolitik, has not satisfied anyone.

Another lack of realpolitik of the Report is its proposal that the Security Council to endorse or authorize the legitimate use of force should be asked to "meet five criteria of legitimacy," namely: 1) there a serious threat, 2) that there is a proper purpose, strictly aimed at preventing the threat and no other ulterior motive, 3) that the force as a last resort, 4) that the response is proportional and 5) that the consequences are balanced, ie the use of military force is not worse than not having used it.
These five criteria are nothing less than a conceptual transposition of the terms of the "Just War" established by St. Augustine, then to St. Thomas Aquinas and later systematized by the jurist Vitoria. All of them make more rigid the operation of the system of collective security. It is truly pathetic that in the XXI century, when a terrorist attack, nuclear, chemical or biological or the outbreak of genocide or ethnic cleansing can become a reality in a small fraction of the time, you are prompted to countries threatened or those who want to prevent genocide, to demonstrate to the Security Council to meet the five requirements of the medieval "just war." If today the United Nations can not stop the genocide in Darfur, how it would be if you have to test these criteria from the medieval scholastic!

The problem with the Security Council to legitimate use of force will not resolve to observe the five principles of the medieval just war, but providing military capabilities to the Council, turning it into a sword mechanism to intervene quickly. The system of collective security United Nations may have all the legitimacy criteria you want, but if you do not have standing armed forces to intervene, Nor will his "legitimacy."

A true reform of the collective security system must be put as priority the urgent need for United Nations hold the sword, ie muster a standing force of UN peacekeepers stationed in various strategic areas of the globe for rapid deployment and thus deter, prevent and remove threats to peace and security. While the report acknowledges the lack of military capacity with the United Nations today to impose peace, not make it the epicenter a new system of collective security.

The main problem of the collective security system of the UN is that there are no brigades, battalions of peacekeepers embedded permanently within the armed forces of Member States to put immediately to the Council Security and deployment to conflict areas quickly. United Nations thus has no sword to pacify civil conflicts and prevent genocides. Whenever the Council decides to intervene militarily, it takes months to receive voluntary contributions and other military months, effective military force. Meanwhile, the aggression and genocide as they occurred. United Nations always comes later. His fiascos in Bosnia and Rwanda and now Darfur are clear examples that the central problem that has its system of collective security is not the lack of legitimacy medieval, but his lack of sword to pacify domestic hell are emerging in the world underdeveloped.

all the proposals of the Report, the most daring and important limitation of the absolute conception of national sovereignty when it comes to protecting populations from crimes against humanity, including genocide, ethnic cleansing and rape massive human rights. Indeed, the Report's authors argue that Article 2, paragraph 7 of the Charter of the United Nations establishing absolute respect for the domestic affairs of States, are not in line with the new global ethic to protect populations from crimes against humanity committed by their governments. In other words, the regimes that protect or destroy the lives of its citizens lost their sovereignty and can be taken over militarily by the United Nations, since it can not ever abdicate its responsibility to protect humanity.

Undoubtedly, the report is absolutely right, the homos sapiens are above the state and our humanity and our human rights should prevail over national sovereignty. However, this reform very positive may not be approved because the vast majority of UN member countries are authoritarian regimes or low-intensity democracies constantly take refuge in article 2, paragraph 7, "non-United Nations intervention in domestic affairs" to cover violations of human rights of its citizens. However, if by some miracle this proposal is approved, we will meet again with a Security Council without a sword to intervene quickly and prevent genocides. Darfur is a clear proof of this.

Finally, with regard to a new distribution of world power, the report does not extend the right to veto any State, leaving, as brides abandoned at the altar of world power in Germany, Japan, India, Brazil, South Africa and Nigeria who claimed to be permanent members with veto power. Perhaps this is a realistic as the world power is not shared so easily on the recommendation of technocrats. Thus, the report provides for the possibility of expanding the permanent members without veto power, raising two formulas: A) Six new permanent members without veto power. B) A new category of eight semi-parmanent too without a veto, elected for 4 years re-elected. These formulas are not content to anyone.

The truth is that the increase of more members in the Security Council does not solve the big problem with the United Nations, which is its lack of global representation. In other words, the organization composed exclusively of nation states is less and less, the true structure of the international community today is made also by non-state actors such as transnational corporations and civil society organizations of global reach. For example, today the great debate between two approaches to globalization is, outside the United Nations, including the Davos Forum, representing multinational companies and the Social Forum, which represents civil society.

The United Nations can not remain just a forum for representatives from governments, many of whom have no real power to change the global economic and ecological trends. The stark reality is that most UN member countries are quasi underdeveloped nation states have less real power that transnational corporations and global scope least that many large civil society organizations. To solve economic, social and ecological challenges is necessary to extend the concept of international co-responsibility for transnational corporations and civil society, engaging in certain specific negotiations. Only then Nations United will be the true reflection of the real world and his decisions accepted by all actors of globalization ..

However, the main problem facing the United Nations reform, is that reform is promoted by the General Secretariat, that is reform coming from the international bureaucracy to the States. It does not appear in the Member States themselves, including the most powerful. Reform is not even consulted in advance with the five permanent members with veto power. The silence of the great powers is significant.
The truth is that, according to historical experience, a new international security system has never emerged from a proposal technocrat. The security system called the Concert of Europe, was the result of the bloody Napoleonic wars and a new balance of power established by Congress in Vienna in 1815. The collective security system of the League of Nations was the result of the slaughter of an entire generation of Europeans in the trenches of the First World War. The current system of collective security of the United Nations was the result of the death of more than 60 million people, soldiers and civilians in World War II, including the Holocaust and two nuclear bombs. Humanity learns more tragedies than Reports. The new century international security XXI will not be born of a blue print of the Secretary General but socio-political turmoil of the chaotic real world.

The failure of a proposed reform from the bureaucracy will not be the obituary of the Organization. Even without reform, the United Nations Organization is indispensable to meet the threats of the XXI century. Or nuclear proliferation or terrorism or climate change, international crime and even less poverty can be addressed globally without the multilateral system. The United Nations is like a hospital where many times you can not beat death, but worse is not having it.
Oswaldo de Rivero
NY, January 2005