 Your new post is loading...
2009
Statement by H.E. Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti at the Fourth Round of Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (December 8, 2009)
General Assembly: Security Council Reform – Statement by Mr. Gérard Araud, Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations (December 8, 2009)This general statement by the French Ambassador proposes compromise reforms that could be implemented more immediately while a new reform model is designed. (Permanent Mission of France to the UN)
Statement by Ambassador Zhang Yesui, Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations, at Debate of the 64th Session of the General Assembly on the Work and Reform of the Security Council (November 13, 2009)
Statement by the Mission of Spain on Security Council Reform (November 12, 2009)Brazil: Statement by Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti on Security Council Reform (September 2, 2009)As part of the G4 group, Brazil argues that a more diversified group of permanent members will lead to a more representative Security Council. Viotti explains that Brazil's interests and needs are similar to countries in the developing world, and a Brazilian permanent seat in the Council would therefore make it more representative. She suggests that the majority of member states in the UN should elect the permanent members. Viotti argues that the only solution to alter the balance of power in the Security Council is to expand the Council in both permanent and non-permanent categories. (Permanent Mission of Brazil to the United Nations) Italy: Statement by Ambassador Giulio Terzi on Security Council Reform (September 2, 2009)Ambassador Terzi argues that the greatest obstacle for a Security Council reform is the G4 group's persistent request for permanent seats. According to Terzi, expanding the Security Council with five permanent members would make the council neither more democratic nor more representative. Furthermore, identifying five countries that deserve these permanent seats would be close to impossible, since the role of international actors in the world constantly changes due to political and economic factors. (Permanent Mission of Italy to the United Nations)
France: Statement by Mr. Gérard Araud (September 1, 2009)Statement by Colombia and Italy on Security Council Reform (April 20, 2009)Small-5 Group on Reform of Working Methods of Security Council (April 7, 2009)Ambassador Peter Maurer of Switzerland presented this brief statement on behalf of the Small-5 Group (Liechtenstein, Singapore, Switzerland, Jordan and Costa Rica). He emphasized that reform of the Council should be extended beyond membership change to include reform of the Council's working methods. The S-5 wants change in the way the Council meets, the way it conducts its business, the way it interacts with the General Assembly and the means by which it is transparent and responsive to the international community. The S-5, which has been working for several years, has submitted a formal proposal and requests Council action on it.( Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the UN) Brazil: Statement by Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti (April 7, 2009)The African group says the current membership in the Security Council is unacceptable and calls for an enlargement in both permanent and non-permanent seats. It argues that Africa should have no less than two permanent seats with all the privileges of the current five permanent members. The group claims that better African representation in the Council will contribute to the maintenance of peace and security in the continent. (Mission of Sierra Leone to the UN)
Statement by H.E. Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti at the Plenary Informal Meeting of the General Assembly on the Reform of the Security Council (March 4, 2009)This statement by Ambassador Viotti focuses on the need for expansion of permanent and non-permanent members of the Council to make it more reflective of the modern world. The Brazillians reject the idea of “intermediate or interim reform” because the “term has become too equivocal and has lost its utility” since it is not linked to specifics proposals. ( Permanent Mission of Brazil to the United Nations) General Assembly Meeting on Security Council Reform : Categories of Membership - Statement by H.E. Mr. Jean-Maurice Ripert, Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations (March 4, 2009)Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert stated to the General Assembly France’s support for membership changes in the Security Council as a part of reform. In this statement, the French give their support to the G4 and to Africa in their bids for permanent membership. Additionally, the Ambassador references the British-French proposal for an intermediate reform with immediately renewable seats with longer terms to experiment with composition of the Council before making permanent reforms. ( Permanent Mission of France to the UN)
Statement by Ambassador Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, at an Informal Meeting of the General Assembly on Security Council Reform (February 19, 2009)In this statements, Ambassador Rice highlights the need for Security Council reform to make the Council representative of a 21st century world, and expresses US support for expansion as long as it does not reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the body. The US also sees Council reform as a separate issue from more general UN reform. (US Mission to the UN)
Statement by Ambassador Peter Maurer at the Start of the Intergovernmental Negotiations (February 19, 2009)At the start of intergovernmental negotiation on Security Council Reform, Ambassador Maurer of Switzerland highlights his country’s policies. He critiques the deadlock over expansion and membership reform and stresses the need to continue improving the transparency and working methods. ( Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations)
Statement by H.E. Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti at the Plenary Informal Meeting of the General Assembly on the Reform of the Security Council (February 19, 2009)
2005Statement by US Ambassador on Security Council Reform (November 10, 2005)In his statement to the General Assembly, US Ambassador John Bolton reiterated that the US will not support the attempts of Germany, Brazil and India to enlarge the Security Council, arguing that boosting the number of seats to 25 would weaken the body's ability to act. Neither will it consider the proposal from Switzerland, Singapore, Jordan, Costa Rica and Liechtenstein to improve the methods of work of the Security Council: "As clearly stated in the Charter, the Security Council alone can determine its own working methods and procedures." Liechtenstein Statement by Foreign Minister Rita Kieber-Beck (September 23, 2005)Reforms "cannot be dictated by power or money," warned Italian Ambassador Marcello Spatafora, as he accused Group of Four countries of using "financial leverage" in order to gain support for their Security Council enlargement resolution. In this surprisingly harsh and direct statement, Spatafora implores the General Assembly to take a stand on the G-4's improper and unethical practices rather than "sweep the dust under the carpet." Statement by US Ambassador Tahir-Kheli on Security Council Reform (July 12, 2005)Addressing the Group of Four countries as "good friends of the United States," Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State for UN Reform, Ambassador Shirin Tahir-Kheli nevertheless says, "Let me be as clear as possible: the US does not think any proposal to expand the Security Council" including one based on our own ideas "should be voted upon at this stage." She dismisses the G-4 and other proposals because they lack broad support and could undermine the effectiveness of the Council, and urges other countries to oppose a vote on the G-4's framework resolution. Statement by Canadian Ambassador on Security Council Reform (July 12, 2005)Ambassador Allan Rock criticizes the Security Council for being "fixed" rather than "fluid," an "anomaly to be accommodated, not a model to be emulated." A member of the Uniting for Consensus group, Canada supports Council expansion but opposes the Group of Four framework resolution due to its undemocratic and inflexible nature; as Rock noted, "I know of no democracy in which a single election is sufficient to entitle the winner to remain in office in perpetuity." Statement by Swedish Ambassador on Security Council Reform (July 11, 2005)Swedish Ambassador Anders Lidén considers Security Council reform "one of the more daunting tasks and also one of the most important" preceding the General Assembly (GA) meeting in September 2005. Taking note of the existing Group of Four tabled resolution, Lidén argues against even the consideration of veto power for new permanent members, while asking for a review mechanism to ensure that a two-thirds majority vote in the GA could replace new permanent members who "fail in their responsibilities." Statement by Pakistan Ambassador on Security Council Reform (July 11, 2005)In his statement to the General Assembly during the debate on the Group of Four's draft framework resolution, Pakistani Ambassador Munir Akram warns that Brazil, Germany, India and Japan have "hijacked" the important goal of strengthening the UN. Using strongly critical language, Akram says the G-4's drive for permanent Security Council seats is purely a selfish move, and "to add insult to injury, self-interest has been portrayed as altruism." Akram instead endorses the proposal of the Uniting for Consensus group. Statement by Ambassador Wang Guangya on Security Council reform at the 59th Session of the General Assembly (July 11, 2005)This statement to the General Assembly stresses the main points of the same year’s policy paper, but it also emphasizes that there must be a process to achieve consensus in order to reform the Council. China also gives explicit support for an African seat along with expansion to include more developing countries.(Mission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations)
Position Paper of the People's Republic of China on the United Nations Reforms (June 7, 2005)This position paper by China on UN emphasizes membership and representation. However, the paper focuses more on the methods of determining reform, mainly through consultation within regional groups and then the UN member states as a whole, prior to bringing proposals to a vote. The policy allows the Chinese to appear in favor of reform while demonstrating that the process should move forward with any speed. (Mission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations)
2000Ambassador Shamshad Ahmad Khan of Pakistan at the General Assembly (November 18, 2000)Strongly opposing any move to expand the permanent seats in the council, Pakistan's Ambassador states that "There is no justification for the creation of new centers of privilege at the cost and expense of the rest of the membership." (Karachi Dawn) Letter Submitted by the Delegation of Italy to the Open Ended Working Group of the Security Council (July 10, 2000)A draft paper for discussion regarding "legal observation on the notion of permanent membership on the Security Council." Italy hopes to push for progress in the deliberations by focusing on fundamental and structural questions, rather than meddling with the ambiguous language often used in Security Council reform proposals.(Document A/AC.247/2000/CRP.5) Foreign Ministers in Havana Call for Democratization of United Nations, Enlargement of Security Council (April 12, 2000)In an informal discussion of G77 members, ministers of developing countries urged the democratization of the decision making process in the UN. They also called to discard the "one-size-fits-all" mentality of describing what constitutes a democratic government. (Group of 77) Letter Submitted by the Germany to the Open Ended Working Group of the Security Council (March 31, 2000)A proposal from Germany for Council members to explain reasons for casting a veto. Germany argues that for veto members of the Council, justifying their actions might make it more difficult for them to cast a veto. In an ideal scenario, they might even refrain from using the veto altogether. (A/AC.247/2000/CRP.5, Annex VII )
UN Documents2011 Small Five Tabled Resolution on Security Council Working Methods (April 2011)
The Small Five (S5) introduced a new resolution aimed at reforming Security Council working methods. It is an updated version of the draft resolution from 2005. (Permanenet Mission of Switzerland to the UN)
Letter from Ambassador Tanin including the Revised Text on Security Council Reform (February 23, 2011) Ambassador Tanin presents the most up to date revisions on the working paper for Security Council reform. It includes the incorporated changes proposed by member-states up to the deadline of February 15, 2011. (Center for UN Reform Education) 2010 Letter From the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (November 29, 2010) This letter from Ambassador Tanin gives an update on the status of the text based negotiation on Security Council reform. (United Nations)
Letter from the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (May 26, 2010) This letter from Ambassador Tanin gives an overview for the next round of negotiations on Council reform and provides the revised text based on member state input on the original text. (United Nations)
Letter and Text from the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (May 10, 2010) The letter explains the included text, which was constructed based on input submitted by member states, and that the process of Council reform will continue based upon this text. (United Nations)
Letter from the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (March 11, 2010) This letter from Ambassador Tanin states that he has received opinions from a large number of member states on Security Council reform and is willing to continue meeting with them while preparing the negotiating text. (United Nations) Letter from the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (February 5, 2010) This letter describes that the next step in the process is transparent text based negotiations. Included with the letter are the texts available on positions and proposals for Council reform. Ambassador Tanin also invites that all member states to submit proposals by writing to be used for the negotiation text. (United Nations) Letter from the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (January 13, 2010) Following the first round of talks in the intergovernmental negotiations, this letter summarizes the progress made and the intent of a second round of talks focusing on convergences. It also includes the letter signed by 138 member states to demonstrate their “active and constructive engagements with the process.” (Permanent Mission of Afghanistan to the United Nations) 2009Letter From the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform (November 16, 2009) This letter from Afghan Ambassador Zahir Tanin explains that the fourth round of negotiations on Security Council reform will focus on positions and proposals “on the table” in December 2009. (Permanent Mission of Afghanistan to the United Nations) Press Conference by General Assembly Facilitator on Security Council Reform (July 20, 2009)A third round of negotiations on Security Council reform is scheduled to begin on August 27, 2009. Zahir Tanin, the ambassador of Afghanistan and facilitator of the negotiations, has presented an overview. He announced that there is a consensus among all states on continuing the process. Tanin said that he saw "a light at the end of tunnel" after the first two sessions, but "there is a long way to go." (United Nations) Overview of the first round of Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform, presented by Ambassador Zahir Tanin of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (May 18, 2009)2007Report of the Facilitators for Security Council Reform to the General Assembly (June 26, 2007) In their report to the President of the General Assembly, the facilitators, Ambassadors Heraldo Muñoz of Chile and Christian Wenaweser of Liechtenstein, propose a temporary approach to expedite Security Council reform. This transition period should include a new category of membership with longer-term seats, either renewable or not. The agreement would include a mandatory review in a set number of years. The facilitators do not recommend how many new seats should be added, nor how long the transitional phase should last, but insist that the process move from consultations to concrete intergovernmental negotiations. Report of the Facilitators for Security Council Reform to the General Assembly (April 19, 2007)The ambassadors of Tunisia, Cyprus, Croatia, Chile and the Netherlands facilitated a UN General Assembly report on Security Council reform. The report proposes temporarily expanding Security Council membership as part of a transitional approach to reform. Making available more Security Council seats would increase countries' chances of achieving Security Council membership. 2006Note by the President of the Security Council (July 19, 2006) In a significant move, the Security Council adopted a note by the President, attempting to clarify its procedures and practice. Following months of work by the Council's Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Matters, the note codifies the terminology used in different Council sessions (including Arria Formula meetings with NGOs); lists steps at making the Council's work more transparent; and aims at improving the flow of information from the Council. The note picks up some proposals made by Costa Rica, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Singapore and Switzerland, who introduced a draft resolution calling for greater transparency in the Council's work in March 2006. Draft Resolution on Reforming the Working Methods of the Security Council (March 20, 2006) Switzerland together with Singapore, Jordan, Costa Rica and Liechtenstein tabled a draft resolution in the General Assembly (GA) proposing 19 measures to improve the working methods of the Security Council. Acknowledging that the Security Council is the master of its own procedures, the initiative serves as an invitation by the GA to the Security Council to open a dialogue with all UN member states. This is a revised version of the resolution put forward by group in November 2005 after consulting with other governments about the document. 2005Small Five Draft Resolution (November 10, 2005) This is the draft resolution proposal put forward by the S5 that emphasizes working methods reform. Tabled Uniting for Consensus Draft Resolution on Security Council Reform (July 21, 2005) In response to draft resolutions tabled by the G-4 and the African Union, Uniting for Consensus has tabled its alternative proposal. The draft resolution proposes adding 10 non-permanent members immediately eligible for re-election to the Security Council, leaving formalities of re-election and rotation to regional groups. Tabled African Union Draft Resolution on Security Council Reform (July 14, 2005) Also responding to the G-4 resolution, the African Union has tabled its proposal calling for 11 additional members on the Security Council, with Africa gaining two permanent seats and five non-permanent seats. The AU also recommends that new permanent members gain all existing privileges including veto power. Tabled G-4 Draft Resolution on Security Council Reform (July 6, 2005) Brazil, Germany, India and Japan have tabled their draft "framework" resolution calling for Security Council enlargement to 25 members, including six additional permanent seats. In a desperate attempt to secure permanent membership, the Group of Four (G-4) had accepted to forego their right of veto for at least 15 years. The less contentious proposals on the Council's working methods have more of a chance to succeed than membership expansion plans. Also see previous versions of June 8 and May 13 . China: UN Council Resolution Dangerous (June 1, 2005)In June 2005, Brazil, Germany, India and China (the "G4") will ask the General Assembly (GA) to vote on a draft resolution, which calls for Security Council expansion and gives the G4 permanent membership. The resolution meets strong opposition from China, which called it "dangerous" and has "hinted it would use its veto." According to Chinese UN Ambassador Wang Guangya, this resolution will "split UN membership" and prevent member states from discussing other UN reform issues. Nevertheless, China has indicated that if the GA and the other Security Council permanent members accept the G4 proposal, Beijing "would take into account the feelings of others." (Associated Press) Excerpt of Kofi Annan's Report on UN Reform: In Larger Freedom (March 21, 2005)In his report on UN reform, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan only touches very briefly upon Security Council reform, and does not recommend specific action on this vital aspect of UN reform. Annan urges member states to consider both models A and B, as outlined by the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, and calls on states to reach a decision on Security Council enlargement before the summit in September 2005. (United Nations) 2004Excerpt of the High Level Panel's Report on Threats, Challenges and Change (December 2004)Among broad recommendations for reform of the UN, this excerpt of the High Level Panel's Report focuses specifically on Security Council reform. In order to increase the Council's effectiveness and credibility and "enhance its capacity to act in the face of threats," the Panel puts forward two options for expansion without veto powers. Model A foresees enlargement with both permanent and elected members, whereas model B proposes enlarging the Council with only temporary elected members. The Panel also recommends the introduction of a system of "indicative voting" and encourages an increase in the Council's transparency and accountability. (United Nations) 2002Procedural Developments in the Security Council - 2001 (June 6, 2002) This UN Secretariat report shows developments in the procedures and working methods that the Security Council has undertaken in 2001 to promote transparency, openness and efficiency. The document provides interesting data on the work of the Council.
By: Sam Waswa
May 4,2015
796 Viewed
Be the First to Comment
#PRA Yoweri Museveni
President Museveni on Monday delivered a strong worded key address at the high-level thematic debate on strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and regional and sub-regional organizations.
Below is his full speech.
This year, 2015, marks the 70th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. When the UN was created, many of our countries did not exist as independent countries.
In Africa, Ethiopia and Liberia were the only sovereign countries on the continent. While there have been some modest reforms in the UN since its creation in 1945, most of the fundamental structures that were created after World War II by the victorious powers, such as the powers conferred upon the Permanent Five countries in the Security Council, remain unchanged.
Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations provides for cooperation between the UN and Regional Organizations. Despite this, it reserves the right for the UN Security Council to authorize enforcement action. However, the crucial decisions of international peace and security, within the Security Council, are mostly taken by the veto-wielding members.
This is a big mistake and has already caused a lot of harm to Africa, like in the case of Libya where Africa’s opinion was ignored; hence, the present massive human hemorrhage in that area.
If the Security Council members that took military action in Libya had listened to the voice of Africa, the present chaos in Libya, Nigeria, Mali, the people who are dying in the Mediterranean Sea from the African shores trying to get to Europe, could have been avoided. In fact, Gaddaffi’s Libya used to employ many workers from Africa.
In any case, it was very presumptuous for the five permanent members to claim that they are responsible for global security. Out of the global human population that is now 7 billion people, the 5 permanent members represent only about 1.9 billion people. How and why should they monopolize the “responsibility” for global security? This is a structural deficiency in the architecture for global security.
To talk about strengthening cooperation, between the UN and regional and sub-regional organizations, one has got to start by re-examining the structures of the whole UN itself and change some of the old fashioned ones to conform to the current realities.
Uganda strongly believes that for genuine cooperation to occur between the UN and regional and sub-regional organizations, reform of the UN in general, Security Council in particular, is imperative.
This, in the long run, will help us, collectively, to prevent the use of the UN for national or group interests of the powerful members to undermine the efforts of regional organizations and of peace in the world.
In the meantime and as we strive to reform the UN into a modern and relevant organization that serves all its members based on sovereign equality as embedded in its Charter, the starting point for cooperation is that we need to reaffirm the Principle of Complementarity envisaged in Chapter VIII of the Charter as the basis for building and strengthening cooperation between the UN and regional and sub-regional organizations.
The United Nations should, therefore, respect processes that are undertaken by the regional organizations especially in areas of conflict resolution. While we abhor impunity, the UN approach that usually, superficially and without proper contextualization, emphasizes justice in instances of conflict resolution at the expense of long term peace, is manifestly self-defeating.
In this regard, the UN should not just blindly pursue the option of placing sanctions on individuals or referring them to the ICC without holding consultations with the regions affected as this often undermines the very process of resolving the conflict in question.
On the other hand, where the UN has worked in consonance with regional or sub-regional organizations, there have been tangible positive results as is the case in Somalia and Burundi.
Many of the conflicts are results of distortions and mistakes of long duration endogenously and exogenously authored and perpetuated. Therefore, last minute high-handed interventions without a thorough understanding of the dynamics of the situation are wrong and injurious to the hapless populations of the concerned areas.
Secondly, we need to harmonize our understanding of what complementarity entails. This, in our opinion, means the recognition that both the UN and regional organizations have various strengths and weaknesses and hence the need to complement rather than supplement each other’s roles in the areas of conflict prevention, mediation, resolution, peacekeeping and peace-building.
Thirdly, from Uganda’s and, indeed Africa’s, perspective, complementarity also entails sharing the burden of maintaining international peace and security, consultative decision-making and respect for regional processes, as well as division of labor based on comparative advantage.
Mr. President,
Many on the African continent and elsewhere have come around to agreeing with what Uganda and other African patriots have been advocating for, for long: African solutions for African problems. The international community, including the UN, can only support and should, therefore, respect regional processes.
You are all aware of the long period it takes the UN to deploy in a crisis situation. The process from initial consultations, to a “zero” draft resolution, through several rounds of negotiations on actual drafts to a final resolution authorizing any form of action, can take agonizingly long to come through.
That is if one or more of the Permanent Members with veto power does not use it to block the process. Some crises situations are such that an immediate and robust response is required. This can best be done by countries in the region.
Such a situation occurred in December 2013 in South Sudan and the UN Security Council is still debating the issue up to now!!!! If we in the region had not acted when we did quickly, the region could possibly have had genocide.
The neighboring countries could have stopped the genocide of Rwanda in 1994. We could not do it because the UN was obstructing us.
Uganda, therefore, strongly supports the establishment of the African Capacity for Immediate Response to Crises (ACIRC) which is an African owned initiative for rapid military intervention as and when the need arises, to quickly respond to crisis situations on the African continent.
We believe support to this mechanism will strengthen the international community’s resolve to deal with crises that threaten international and regional peace and security.
In situations where actual deployment by the UN has been taken as in Eastern DRC, the mandate of the mission is often so restricted that you end up with a “sitting duck” mission with troops in a “peace-keeping” role with no peace to keep.
What we need in Africa is support from international community in terms of funding and equipment so that we can do the job ourselves. It is true that due to the phenomenon of colonialism and neo-colonialism in Africa, many of our countries still face challenges of ensuring peace for their nationals because they do not build capacity.
Therefore, in cases where the national army and security forces fail to guarantee peace, the region can step in and only be supported by the international community, including the United Nations. I refer to this arrangement as the Trinity; that is to say the internal stakeholders, the region and the international community.
Where this has happened as in DRC with the internationally supported Intervention Brigade from contiguous African States, the results have been positive to some extent. Support for an African rapid response force would go a long way in strengthening cooperation between the UN, regional and sub-regional organizations.
Mr. President,
I have already referred to the support to the regions by the UN. The major challenge in addressing regional and sub-regional issues whether in peace and security, humanitarian response or regional integration and economic development, is inadequate resources. Most of the African countries have instituted reforms which have seen the region as a whole registering some of the fastest economic growth.
However, in the long run, we shall need partnerships with the international community, including the UN, to develop our own capacities.
To demonstrate our resolve to address these challenges, Uganda strongly supports the African Union’s commitment to increase the proportion of the cost of AU peace operations covered by its Member States. This is in addition to contributing about 45% of the UN’s uniformed peacekeepers.
On the other hand, since the UN has the duty to support regional organizations as provided for in the Charter, Uganda supports the use of UN assessed contributions to support regional-led peace operations, based on the fact that the UNSC retains the primacy for the maintenance of international peace and security. This is because Uganda believes that the use of funding mechanisms like Trust Funds, while helpful in the short run, are unreliable and unpredictable since they are based on voluntary contributions.
We also believe that strengthening cooperation between the UN and Regional and Sub-regional Organizations, will greatly benefit the implementation of Post-2015 Development Agenda.
On account of the leverage they have with their respective constituent member countries, regional and sub-regional organizations provide useful fora for policy coordination and harmonization on various ongoing important multilateral processes, including the Post 2015 Development Agenda, climate change, the WTO Doha Round, among others.
They are also central in coordinating the implementation of the outcomes from these multilateral processes at their appropriate levels.
Regional and sub-regional organizations are at the centre of promoting cooperation and integration in areas such as trade and investment, infrastructure development, critical sectors including agriculture, energy, water, security, etc. as well as fostering private sector partnerships.
I cannot end my comments without making two final points. One point is the question of ideological disorientation. This entails the misdiagnosis of social, political or economic issues and acting on the basis of the misdiagnosis, especially with the use of force ─ regular or irregular.
In the past that ideological disorientation manifested itself in imperialism and colonialism. They caused so much damage to societies and peoples. The colonized peoples rose up and, after great sacrifices, defeated the overt aspects of imperialism and colonialism.
Today, the dominant form of ideological disorientation is sectarianism of religion, tribe or, even, clans and chauvinism of gender and, sometimes, of race.
This ideology of sectarianism and chauvinism is a pseudo ─ ideology that tries to promote the issue of identity in such a manner that it eclipses the very people’s legitimate interests of economic exchange, interaction and shared prosperity.
Most of the time, they even mis-define identity on opportunistic, an irrational basis where the actors wish to remain “big fishes in small ponds” as one of our leaders once said. Many of the conflicts in the world are authored, promoted and fueled by this ideological disorientation.
We cannot only deal with the consequences but not look at the causes. Some parts of the international community have been able to blacklist what they call anti-Semitism.
Why can’t something be done about sectarianism and chauvinism? How can we hobnob with sectarianisms and chauvinists and then talk about global peace when these pseudo ─ ideologies are the causes of the very conflicts we are talking about?
The second point is the discipline and, indeed, orientation of the international forces, the regional forces or the local forces the UN system uses or relies on to keep or enforce peace.
Uganda had become a failed State by the 1970s and 1980s. We were only able to rescue it by assaulting ideological disorientation mentioned above and dealing most harshly with indisciplined soldiers that loot people’s property, rape and defile women, take sex-slaves or commit homicide.
If the UN system, the regional forces or those acting under us are not able to handle the question of discipline, we shall become part of the problem and not part of the solution.
I thank you.
Yoweri Kaguta Museveni
The United Nations Development Assistance Plan (UNDAP) is a common business plan for the United Nations agencies and national partners, aligned to the priorities of the host country and the internationally agreed development goals. The UNDAP builds on the current joint programming processes for developing an UNDAF and UNDAF Action Plan.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia United Nations Development Assistance PlanAbbreviationUNDAP The United Nations Development Assistance Plan (UNDAP) is a common business plan for the United Nations agencies and national partners, aligned to the priorities of the host country and the internationally agreed development goals. The UNDAP builds on the current joint programming processes for developing an UNDAF and UNDAF Action Plan. The UNDAP methodology was first used in Tanzania. The methodology was designed based on experiences from previous UNDAF cycle, the Delivering as One (DaO) experience and JAST[1] participation. It was also a response to the recommendations from the DaO Country Led Evaluation. UNDAP aims to reduce duplication in planning requirements for UN agencies and national partners, and for some agencies to replace the current requirements of the UNDAF and agency-specific country programme planning documents. UNDAP aims to bring together agency specific planning requirements in a consistent and seamless manner, and ensure a ‘necessary and sufficient’ programme logic in the results chain and resource requirements. The plan outlines linkages to regional and global initiatives at the sectoral level, forging greater synergy between UN plans in addition to support of larger multilateral and bilateral programmes. Annual reviews and adjustments ensure the continued relevance of the UNDAP; the plan and its implementation modalities ensure coherence and consistency from actions to results to reporting, yielding a synergistic effect. TanzaniaTanzania was the first country to use the UNDAP methodology. The four-year USD $777 million UNDAP for Tanzania was approved on 24 June 2011 by the Tanzanian Governments' Joint Steering Committee (JSC) and United Nations[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] UNDAP 2011-15 Tanzania As part of the UNDAP development and in line with the agreement reached by UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and WFP, a Common Country Programme Document (CCPD) has been prepared and submitted together with agency specific annexes. The CCPD is an extract of the contribution of the four agencies to the UNDAP. UruguayA joint workshop was held in Uruguay in May 2010 to discuss the design of a UNDAP plan in relation to the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) agreemement between the Uruguayan Government and the United Nations.[11] See also
2012-2016 quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) of the General Assembly of UN operational activities for development1) About the 2012-2016 QCPR 2) Implementation of the 2012-2016 QCPR resolution 3) ECOSOC Operational Activities for Development Segment 4) 2012-2016 QCPR outcome and preparations 5) Archive of past TCPR resolutions
1) About the 2012-2016 QCPR The General Assembly adopted on 21 December 2012 a landmark resolution (67/226) on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) of UN operational activities for development. The resolution is the culmination of two months of intensive intergovernmental negotiations underpinned by comprehensive analytical preparations supported by DESA and UN system entities. The QCPR is the mechanism through which the General Assembly assesses the effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and impact of UN operational activities for development and establishes system-wide policy orientations for the development cooperation and country-level modalities of the UN system in response to the evolving international development and cooperation environment. 2) Implementation of the 2012-2016 QCPR resolution 2014 Reports
2013 Reports
Surveys a) Survey of UN Resident Coordinators b) Survey of Operations Management Teams
3) ECOSOC Operational Activities for Development Segment 2014 (24-26 February) 2013 (10-12 July) 2012 (13-17 July) 4) 2012-2016 QCPR outcome and preparations Outcome Reports Negotiations and Information briefs Below are written inputs provided by the secretariat in response to specific questions tabled by Member States during the QCPR negotiations: 1) The relationship between the GA resolution on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review of UN operational activities for development and the specialized agencies
2) Feasibility to develop a harmonized cost classification system
3) What does the term "interoperability" mean?
4) What is the relationship between the General Assembly and inter-agency bodies such as the CEB, UNDG/CEB and UNEG?
5) Human rights-based approach to development programming
6) Local procurement in programme countries
7) Standard Operating Procedures for Delivering as One approach
- Brief background information
- Surveys
a) Survey of programme country governments on UN operational activities for development b) Survey of UN Resident Coordinators and country team members Preparations for the 2012 QCPR included a survey of UN Resident Coordinators and country team members on selected priority issues relating to UN development operations at the country level. c) Survey of UN Operations Management Teams This survey will examine progress in harmonizing and simplifying business operations of UN entities at the country-level. d) Survey of civil society organizations Preparations for the 2012 QCPR will include a survey of a sample of Civil Society Organizations that work with the UN system at country level on selected priority issues relating to UN development operations at the country-level. The survey will be administered through collaboration with the Better Aid CSO network.
- Analytical preparations
Substantive preparations for the 2012 QCPR will include a series of analytical studies which findings will be synthesized into the Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of GA resolution 62/208 on the TCPR. In addition, the Secretary-General will submit the annual report on funding for UN operational activities for development. Here below are brief descriptions of the respective analysis/studies:Analytical studies Studies in partnership with others
- Stakeholder consultations
Member States Briefings and consultations - Consultation with Member States (5 December 2011)
- Consultation with ECOSOC (8 February 2012)
- Briefing to Group of 13 (28 October 2011)
- Briefing to European Union (10 November 2011)
- Briefing to WFP Executive Board (6 December 2011)
- Briefing to Group of 77 and China (16 December 2011)
- Consultations with Member States (UNIDO HQ, Vienna, 1 March 2012)
- Briefing to EU delegation (16 April 2012)
- Utstein donor group annual consultations (23 April 2012)
- Briefing to G77 (7 May 2012)
PGA/FEF/DESA 3 seminar series on QCPR - Seminar on emerging issues (13 February 2012)
- Seminar on critical mass of funding (29 March 2012)
- Retreat (8-9 June 2012)
UNITAR Training Sessions a) UNITAR training programme (4 November 2011) Presentation by Navid Hanif
Presentation by Kristinn Sv. Helgason
b) Six module course series
Informal workshop with national focal points (12 July 2012) Informal dialogue on Secretary-General's QCPR recommendations (5 October 2012) Informal workshop on recommendations of independent review of system-wide evaluation institutional frameworks (5 November 2012) UN system - Inter-agency briefing (6 September 2011)
- Inter-agency briefing (2 November 2011)
- Inter-agency briefing (17 November 2011)
- UNDAF Programming Network briefing (1 December 2011)
- Resident Coordinator Induction Meeting (5 December 2011)
- MDG Task Force briefing (15 December 2011)
- UNDG-ECHA Working Group briefing (15 December 2011)
- UN Resident Coordinator System WG briefing (16 December 2011)
- Joint Funding and Business Operations Network briefing (20 December 2011)
- Inter-agency briefing (13 January 2012)
- Consultation with UNDG Joint Funding task team (13 January 2012)
- Retreat on UNDAF study with UNDG UNDAF programming network (26 January)
- Briefing to UNDG Gender Network (16 February 2012)
- Inter-agency meeting to discuss progress in improving results-based strategic planning and management (17 February 2012)
- UN Strategic Planning Network (22 February 2012)
- UN Resident Coordinator Working Group special meeting on QCPR RC study (24 February 2012)
- Inter-agency meeting (UNIDO HQ, Vienna, 1 March 2012)
- Interagency briefing (15 March 2012)
- HLCP briefing on QCPR (WMO HQ, Geneva, 20 March 2012)
- UNDG Principal's Meeting (12 April 2012)
- UNDG Advisory Group meeting (17 April 2012)
- Interagency meeting on business practices (26 April 2012)
- Briefing to UNDG Joint Funding and Business Operations Working Group (4 May 2012)
- Briefing to UNDG UNDAF Programming Network (14 May 2012)
- Briefing to DESA Inter-regional Advisors (17 May 2012)
- Briefing to UNDG joint funding task team (30 May 2012)
- Strategic Planning Network (31 May 2012)
- Briefing to UNDG Working Group on Resident Coordinator System Issues (18 July 2012)
- Briefing to UNDG MDG Task Force (18 September 2012)
Civil Society Organizations
- Briefing to NGOs (23 January 2012)
- Thailand, Lao PDR (1-6 March)
- Ethiopia (5-7 March)
- Bolivia (14-16 March)
- Peru (19-22 March)
- Turkey (4-6 April)
- Georgia (10-12 April)
- Review of existing institutional framework for system-wide evaluation
Terms of reference Workplan Note by the Secretary-General on the report of the independent consultants undertaking a comprehensive review of the existing institutional framework for system-wide evaluation of UN operational activities for development Final report JIU response UNEG response Consultations
Briefing to Member States on progress in review of existing institutional framework for system-wide evaluation of UN operational activities for development (5 October 2011)
Briefing to UN entities on progress in review of existing institutional framework for system-wide evaluation of UN operational activities for development (5 October 2011) Consultation with Member States on the draft report of the review of existing institutional framework for system-wide evaluation of UN operational activities for development (17 April 2012)
5) Archive of past TCPR resolutions
Summary No longer are development agendas framed primarily by traditional aid structures: the post-2015 agenda will involve not just governments, but also the …
The Quadrennial comprehensive policy review ( QCPR) of the operational system of the United Nations is a process and a United Nations General Assembly resolution by which the 193 members of the United Nations General Assembly (UN GA) review the coherence effectiveness and funding of the 27 UN development programmes, funds, and specialised agencies of the UN operational system for development.
Quadrennial comprehensive policy review From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) of the operational system of the United Nations is a process and a United Nations General Assembly resolution by which the 193 members of the United Nations General Assembly (UN GA) review the coherence effectiveness and funding of the 27 UN development programmes, funds, and specialised agencies of the UN operational system for development. This review was conducted on a triennial basis until 2007. Since 2008 it has been conducted on a quadrennial basis.[1] Typically, the Quadrennial comprehensive policy review covers the following subjects:[2] - The funding of operational activities of the UN for development including the core funding of its agencies, funds and programmes
- The role of the UN development system in building capacity and fostering development in developing countries
- The responsibility of the UN development system in the global fight against poverty
- The responsibility of the UN development system in promoting South-South cooperation and the development of national capacities
- The importance of placing gender equality and women’s empowerment at the center of the agenda of the UN development system
- Guidance to the UN development system on its operations in countries in transition from relief to development
- Instructions to improve the functioning of the UN development system, and particularly the simplification and harmonization of its business practices
The substantive basis for this review is a report by the Secretary-General of the United Nations which is produced by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) during the summer preceding the UN GA negotiations. This report is then debated in the second committee of the UN GA.[3] The negotiation of the resolution has historically been chaired by the economic and development counselor of the Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations (Olivier Chave 2001 and 2004, Thomas Gass 2007, Pio Wennubst 2012).[4] The implementation of the Quadrennial comprehensive policy review is carried out through the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Further reading- Post 2015: What It Means for the United Nations Development System, Pio Wennubst and Timo Mahn, Briefing Paper 13/2013, German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) - A Resolution for a Quiet Revolution: Taking the United Nations to Sustainable Development ‘Beyond Aid’, Pio Wennubst and Timo Mahn, Discussion Paper 22/2013, German Development Institute /Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) External links
The Security Council's membership and working methods reflect a bygone era. Though geopolitics have changed drastically, the Council has changed relatively little since 1945, when wartime victors crafted a Charter in their interest and awarded "permanent" veto-wielding Council seats for themselves. Since 1993, the UN General Assembly has hotly debated Council reform but has not been able to reach agreement. A handful of states aspire to "permanent" status for themselves, while many other countries reject such claims. This site posts information and documents about the reform process, including analysis of the state-of-play and statements by nations and negotiating blocs. In the background section, we have posted GPF's own policy paper on the problems, dynamics and options for truly Democratic Reform of the Security Council in additional to more general information about Security Council reform. To enrich the current information, we offer a large archive on reform discussions in previous years. These materials are divided into four sections. The Membership section looks at the addition of both permanent members and elected members. Such changes require amendments to the UN Charter, a lengthy and onerous process. The section on Working Methods considers the procedures of the Council and the way it conducts its work. Unlike membership changes, these reforms do not require Charter change and the Council itself can implement them. The section on the Veto looks closely at this key issue and whether it could (and should) be eliminated or curtailed. The Regional Representation section examines the arguments for and against supranational organizations, like the EU, as potential candidates for Council membership. There are many general documents, articles and statements throughout the respective pages. Documents produced by the UN can be found on the UN Documents page and include the documents, reports, draft resolutions and official statements from the Council reform process. The reform of the Council is part of the broader issue of UN Reform, to build a more effective and democratic global institution. This includes the reform of other bodies like the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, as well as improvement in the organization's management and finance. Background on Security Council ReformGeneral Articles and DocumentsUN DocumentsStatementsMembership including Expansion and RepresentationThis page examines proposals for changes in the Council's membership, including additional permanent and/or additional elected members. The membership issue includes discussions about how to make the Council more representative and more legitimate. Membership change requires a difficult process of changing the UN Charter. Regional RepresentationThis section specifically discusses regional representation as a method of Council reform. Transparency including Working Methods and Decision-Making ProcessThe Council has taken some steps to increase its efficiency and transparency in recent years. However, reform of the Council's working methods remains a work in progress. These reforms do not require Charter amendment, so in theory they are easy to implement. But the P-5 usually oppose them. This page contains articles about proposed reforms to the Council's working methods, as well as efforts to increase its transparency and improve its relationship with other UN organs. VetoIn the Council debates, many governments express their opposition to the veto and call for its restriction or elimination. This section presents extensive information about the veto including data, articles and analyses of veto power, including the often-used but little-known "hidden veto." UN ReformAlso see GPF's section on UN Reform, which follows different initiatives, such as the Millennium Summit and Its Follow-Up, the work of different Panels and Working Groups, as well as the reform proposals of Secretary General Kofi Annan. The site also covers the various topics of UN Reform beyond the Security Council, including reform of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and the Human Rights Commission. Conferences on Security Council ReformThis page provides links to information conferences hosted by GPF on Security Council reform and other materials associated with the conferences.Links and Resources
The Four Nations Initiative, also known by the acronym 4NI, is a cooperation project started in 2005 as an initiative by Chile, South Africa, Sweden and Thailand. The initiative was created to contribute to the efforts to reform governance and management systems and structures of the UN Secretariat, departing from the perspective of the UN Member States.
Four Nations Initiative From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Four Nations Initiative, also known by the acronym 4NI, is a cooperation project started in 2005 as an initiative by Chile, South Africa, Sweden and Thailand. The initiative was created to contribute to the efforts to reform governance and management systems and structures of the UN Secretariat, departing from the perspective of the UN Member States. The Four Nations Initiative, active from early 2006 until October 2007, consists of a Steering Committee with representatives from all four countries, and a Secretariat based in Stockholm. UN Secretariat reform is an important topic and was high on the agenda during the tenure of Secretary-General Kofi Annan. There have been many reform efforts, notably the Secretary-General's reports Investing in the United Nations and Mandating and delivering, both from March 2006, and the Comprehensive review of governance and oversight in the UN, June 2006. The Four Nations Initiative differs from the above-mentioned reform initiatives by being driven by Member States themselves. It is also characterised by its focus on a consultations process trying to create as large as possible scope for consensus before actually submitting reform proposals. The Initiative plans to submit final proposals by September 2007 but a preliminary report is already available on the 4NI website (Towards a Compact - report of preliminary proposals by the Steering Committee of the Four Nations Initiative). References- Brief Introduction to the Four Nations Initiative, 2006, Information paper by the 4NI Secretariat
- Comprehensive review of governance and oversight in the UN, 2006, Report of the Steering Committee on governance and oversight, UN Document A/60/883.Add.1-6
- Investing in the United Nations, 2006, Report of the Secretary-General, UN Document A/60/692
- Mandating and delivering, 2006, Report of the Secretary-General, UN Document A/60/733
- Towards a Compact, 2007, Report of preliminary proposals by the Steering Committee of the Four Nations Initiative
External links
|
GPF Perspectives
Towards a Democratic Reform of the UN Security Council (July 13, 2005)James Paul and Céline Nahory argue that adding more permanent members to the Security Council would enlarge a discredited oligarchy rather than build for a democratic future. They also oppose the addition of elected members, arguing that an expanded Council would be too large to function effectively and not substantially more representative. Instead, they propose a process of stronger regional representation as a future-oriented approach that can develop in stages and without the headache of Charter change. ( Global Policy Forum) Security Council Reform Remains Deadlocked (August 5, 2009) Open-Ended Working Group has been working for past 15 years on revamp of 15-member Security Council of the UN. An overwhelming majority agrees that membership should be increased; however there is no consensus on the choice of members. This article reviews the deadlock condition of the reform effort. While talking to IPS, James A. Paul of Global Policy Forum expressed that "beyond the doomed idea of enlarging the oligarchy, other reform ideas stand a better change of adoption." (IPS) DocumentsWhat Impact? The E10 and the 2011 Security Council (March 2011)This IPI Report focuses on the changes in Council dynamics with emerging powers making up a signification portion of the E10. It examines the Council’s change in focus with these countries leading efforts to sustain UN post-conflict involvement and greater support for international justice mechanisms like the ICC. (International Peace Institute) UN Security Council Elections 2010 (September 17, 2010)This Special Report on the upcoming UN Security Council Elections outlines the candidates for the five open non-permanent seats. India, South Africa and Colombia appear to be guaranteed seats as there are no competing candidates for those regions. Two seats for the Western European and Others Group are contested by Canada, Germany and Portugal. The report highlights possible outcomes of the elections. For example, five UN members who have asserted bids for permanent membership could be on the Council in 2011. It also considers the effect of clean slate elections and potential partnerships between future Council members. (Security Council Report) The New General Assembly President Opens Session with Call for UN Reform (September 15, 2009)The new General Assembly President, Ali Treki of Libya, calls for further efforts in reform of the Security Council to make it more representative of all UN member states. He supports a larger role for Africa, Latin America and small states in the Council. Treki also mentioned that the General Assembly ought to have a larger influence in UN decision making. (UN News Centre) Press Conference by General Assembly Facilitator on Security Council Reform (July 20, 2009)A third round of negotiations on Security Council reform is scheduled to begin on August 27, 2009. Zahir Tanin, the ambassador of Afghanistan and facilitator of the negotiations, has presented an overview. He announced that there is a consensus among all states on continuing the process. Tanin said that he saw "a light at the end of tunnel" after the first two sessions, but "there is a long way to go." (United Nations) Second Round of Security Council Reform Talks Ends (June 29, 2009)Report of the Facilitators for Security Council Reform to the General Assembly (June 26, 2007) In their report to the President of the General Assembly, the facilitators, Ambassadors Heraldo Muñoz of Chile and Christian Wenaweser of Liechtenstein, propose a temporary approach to expedite Security Council reform. This transition period should include a new category of membership with longer-term seats, either renewable or not. The agreement would include a mandatory review in a set number of years. The facilitators do not recommend how many new seats should be added, nor how long the transitional phase should last, but insist that the process move from consultations to concrete intergovernmental negotiations. Review of Progress on Security Council Reform (December 19, 2005) In this report, the President of the General Assembly Jan Eliasson reiterates its commitment towards Security Council reform, including issues related to the body's expansion and working methods. In 2005, member states put forward numerous proposals for a more representative, effective and efficient Council. Eliasson encourages member states to continue to engage in constructive dialogue to reach the broadest agreement possible. Articles2012 Turkey Calls for UN Security Council Reform Over Failure to Pressure Syria (September 29,2012)Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan rebuked the UN Security Council for its members’ inability to find a common ground on a resolution to solve the crisis in Syria. Arguing that “it's high time to consider a structural change for international institutions, especially for the UN Security Council," Erdogan described the latest as an unequal and unfair system that failed to reflect the will of most countries. While Erdogan certainly has a point, this statement should be seen as Turkey’s rhetoric in the context of increasing tension and military confrontations on the border with Syria? (The Guardian) In another bid for Security Council reform, African ministers at the United Nations General Assembly called for expansion of the Security Council. "The working methods of the Security Council must be revised to ensure democratization, and its membership must be expanded to include new permanent and non-permanent members of the developing world, particularly Africa, the cradle of civilization," said Algeria's Foreign Minister, Mourad Medelci. But Africa does not have a united position on Council reform and its hopes for expansion of permanent members runs up against firm opposition from the existing five permanent members. (allAfrica) UN General Assembly 2012: Reforming Security Council Should Be Top Priority (September 26, 2012)The 67th annual session of the General Assembly opens the floor to an ongoing debate about Security Council reform. At present, critics of the existing structure say that it reflects the world order sixty years ago, as much of the Global South remains largely unrepresented on the Council. The question is not whether the Security Council needs reform- consent on that is largely unanimous. What needs to be addressed, rather, is the shape that this reform should take. Brazil and India have the strongest cases amongst the “G4 nations”, but their inclusion would still leave out many other groups. Agreeing on which countries may acquire permanent status is almost impossible, and the P5 have blocked any reform initiatives so far. (Policy Mic) Five Lightweights’ Fight to Reform the Security Council (July 2,2012)In the United Nations Security Council, the “Small Five” (Costa Rica, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Singapore and Switzerland) are trying to stand up to the Big Five Permanent members. The Small Five have proposed to reform several of the Security Council’s working methods, the most high-profile of which is the restriction of the use of the veto. After a number of UN member countries opposed China and Russia’s use of the veto on Syria, the S5’s proposal seemed to gain momentum. However, the S5 eventually had to withdraw their proposal for procedural reasons engineered by the Big Five. (Pass Blue)
India Changes Tack to Secure UN Security Council Seat (June 25, 2012)With only six months left of its two year membership on the Security Council, India is changing tactics. India continues to strive for permanent membership on the Security Council. In light of this, India has decided to join the L69 group (comprising 41 countries from Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific) over its previous G4 agenda. New Delhi described the L69 as ‘friends of Security Council reform’ and has decided to support the L69 before the General Assembly in August.(SAFPI)
India's Bid Suffers Setback (March 16, 2012)This article from Pakistan’s The Nation reviews India’s hopes and tactics in achieving Security Council reform. Along with the rest of the G4 (India, Brazil, Germany and Japan), India has been attempting to secure itself a place as a permanent member of the 15-member Security Council, and has claimed wide support for its efforts. However, these supporters are yet to make themselves known. The Security Council reform debate covers five key issues - the category of membership, the question of veto, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Council, and the Council’s working methods and its relationship with the General Assembly. (The Nation) G-4 Nations put Joint Bid for Security Council Expansion (January 26, 2012)India, Japan, Brazil and Germany--- known as the ‘Group of Four’ has put in a joint bid to the United Nations General Assembly, proposing that the Security Council be expanded for both permanent and non-permanent members, as well as a permanent African Seat. Security Council reform continues to be a divisive topic of discussion at the United Nations, and the new bid will reignite the debate in the coming weeks. The motion steers clear of the more controversial areas of the UN reform debate – namely the use of the veto – but is likely to garner severe criticism from the “United for Consensus” group (lead by Italy, Argentina, Colombia, Canada and Pakistan) who wish to block any new permanent member seats. (Times of India) 2011Security Council Reform: Past, Present and Future (December 15, 2011)Shashi Tharoor, former UN Under Secretary General for Public Information, discusses the membership of the Security Council and why it is outdated, inequitable, and unrepresentative. He describes the political tension of expanding the number of permanent members and adding representation from countries of the developing world, steps aimed at righting the current North-South imbalance. There also appears to be wide support across the full UN membership for abolition of the veto. Ultimately, emerging states (like India and Brazil) could strengthen international institutions, or they could lose interest in a body they see as increasingly illegitimate, with far-reaching implications for the future of global cooperation. (Carnegie Council) Update on Security Council Reform (April 5, 2011)This article gives an update on the current state of Security Council Reform discussions in the General Assembly, including summaries of the discussions from October 2010 to March 2011. (Center for UN Reform Education) Countries Ask for ‘Tangible’ Reform of UN Security Council (February 12, 2011)
The G4 has renewed efforts towards more “tangible” Security Council reforms as three of the four are currently serving as elected members. Statements made by the G4 indicate that there may be movement this year in Council reform. (MSN News)
2010
Security Council Reform and the G-20 (November 9, 2010)US backing India for permanent membership on the Security Council just before the G-20 summit was part of US efforts to display its willingness to challenge the status quo in the international system. This article argues that the G-20 is a more representative body that includes the largest economies in the world. As such, the G-20 could serve as a guideline for Council reform that would have greater parity and efficiency. (Center for Strategic and International Studies) The Reform of the UN Security Council (July 2010) This report from Istituto Affari Internazionali discusses the current proposals for Security Council Reform. While there is a general consensus that the Council must be reformed to reflect the current world order, there is no agreement on the scope of reform and how best to implement it. The report looks at the role that regional organizations play and presents arguments for regional representation as a possible means of reforming the Council. (Istituto Affari Internazionali) Restarting Negotiations of the Reform of the Security Council (May 2010) Despite agreement that Security Council reform must take place, there is limited convergence on how the main issues should be addressed. This report discusses the possibility of partial reforms as an intermediary step towards larger Council reform. (Istituto Affari Internazionali) "The United Nations is Beyond Reform... It has to be Reinvented" - Fmr. GA President Miguel d'Escoto (April 26, 2010)Former General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto was one of the distinguished participants at the recent climate conference in Cochabamba. In his interview with Democracy Now, d'Escoto criticized the United States' "hegemonic" role in the United Nations, and further suggested that veto power is open to inappropriate use by permanent members of the Security Council. Such abuse could undermine democracy within the UN. (Democracy Now) UN Security Council Reform: a Gordian Knot? (April 2010)Efforts to reform the UN Security Council have been in the pipeline for decades. However, the efforts have been scuppered by disagreements, regional rivalries and institutional obstacles, which in turn have delegitimized the UNSC reform process. The article argues that the SC reform debate must be reinvigorated and all sides need to demonstrate compromise, without watering down the reform goals. The article highlights reasons for SC reform, competing models for reform, controversial reform issues, structural obstacles to SC reform and Switzerland's role in SC reform. (CSS Analysis) Integrity Too High a Price for Security Council Role (February 3, 2010)Australia questions whether a non-permanent seat on the Security Council in 2013-14 is really worth the effort, expense and moral compromise. The Arab League informed Australia that it would block Canberra's attempts to gain a non-permanent seat because of its pro-Israel stance. Further, Australia is unsure about the purpose of the UN at all: ex-ambassador to the UN, John Dauth, called it "defunct" and "rotten." (The Australian) Increased Security (January 20, 2010)Many who actively advocate for expansion of the UN Security Council's membership argue that an increase in the number of members will remedy the democratic and representative deficit from which the Council suffers. In October 2010, Canada will once again stand for election to a two-year term as non-permanent member of the Security Council. This article represents the Canadian viewpoint as it explores the need for the nation's increased role in the Council. (The Canadvocate) Pros and Cons of Security Council Reform (January 19, 2010)In the heated environment that accompanies Security Council reform debates, opinions and national interests are often presented as altruistic aspirations. As a result, it can be difficult to obtain unbiased information about the pros and cons of various reform proposals that are untainted by national sentiment. The author outlines and explores the advantages and disadvantages of "five key cluster reform areas." It explores two main arguments - one that considers reform an indispensable part of a "just solution," and the other that argues it would only weaken the Council's ability to carry out its duties without solving the problems of equitable representation. (Center for UN Reform) UN Reform Process Mired by Lack of Consensus (January 5, 2010)In a recent statement, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon called for "a strengthened United Nations" which is "effective, efficient, coherent and accountable." This article suggests that the challenge lies in defining what shape UN reforms should take, and what a reformed UN should achieve. It also briefly considers issues concerning reform of the Security Council. (Deutsche Welle) Bosom Buddies? Ban and Obama's Curious Relations (2010)President Obama's election pledge for a close US-UN partnership has failed to materialize. Following tokenistic, initial engagement with the international organization, Obama now rarely talks, let alone acts with the UN. The US has sidelined the UN on Pakistan, Afghanistan, global warming, terrorism, Iran and North Korea (except for sanctions). Sources within the Obama-administration argue that US-disenchantment with the UN stems from Ban Ki-Moon's weak and ineffectual leadership. However, this does not tell the whole story. (World Policy Institute) 2009D'Escoto: "The UN Has Failed" (October 2009)In this video interview, Miguel d'Escoto speaks out on the obstacles he has encountered during his term as General Assembly President. D'Escoto held the democratization of the UN as a key pillar of his Presidency, but ran up against the limits of the General Assembly's power. According to d'Escoto, the UN is failing to effectively address the two objectives for which it was created - the prevention of war and the eradication of poverty - because of the most powerful states' disproportionate influence over the organization. (The Real News Network) European Nations Highlight the Need for Security Council Reform (September 24, 2009)During the UN General Assembly debate, several European leaders have expressed an urgent need for a Security Council reform. According to some, reform is urgent because further delay in will undermine the Council's credibility. In addition, the structure of the UN needs improvement for more effective and successful peacekeeping operations. (UN News) UN Reform: Don't Hold Your Breath (August 26, 2009)According to Ian Williams, member states of the UN have presented many suggestions for a reform of the Security Council. However, other states reject the proposals to protect their own power in the UN. Williams believes that reaching an agreement on a reform of the Security Council is not likely in the near future. He urges citizens of the permanent members to put pressure on their governments to agree to democratic reform. (Foreign Policy in Focus) Iran urges reform of UN Security Council (July 14, 2009)Iran has urged reform of the UN Security Council at a recent meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement stating that the current structure of the Council poses a "challenge" to global peace. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki stated that sanctions imposed by the Council, in dealing with issues that are "not necessarily a threat to global peace and security," are often inappropriate and have violated human rights. He complained that various Council reform proposals, especially those submitted by the NAM, are weakened by differences within the movement and lack of a strong common position.(PressTV) Official Statement from China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States (April 4, 2009)The P-5 members of the Security Council have resisted Council reform, but are making open statements to argue that they must be included in the reform process. As the commentary on this statement shows, the P-5 feel largely ignored as they’re not consulted directly but must respond to proposals in the media. Ironically, it is a reversal of the Security Council where the P-5 is at the center and the rest of the United Nations is waiting for them to release statements (Wordpress)
2008Security Council Reform - An Overview of Member States' Positions (December 8, 2008)This chart by the Center for UN Reform Education outlines the positions of various UN member states on issues relating to Council reform, including regional seats, veto reform, and preferences for timing of intergovernmental negotiations. UN Security Council Reform: Unrealistic Proposals and Viable Reform Options (November 25, 2008)The Security Council does not adequately represent the world's population and its decision making process is slow and not transparent. Abolishing the veto of the five permanent members is not realistic, since all P5 members must agree with this change. The author argues that countries must exert pressure to restrict use of the veto, by requiring the P5 to justify invoking it, especially in cases that are not in their vital interest. (American Diplomacy) Security Council Reform - the 62nd GA Session and the Road Ahead (November 11, 2008)In 1993, UN members including Japan and Germany helped to establish a General Assembly Working Group on Security Council reform, but members of this Working Group cannot agree on various issues such as expansion of the permanent members. In February 2009, further negotiations will take place, but as in the past, the divergent interests of UN members are likely to stand in the way of any reform agreement.(Center for UN Reform Education) UN Security Council Reform: Unrealistic Proposals and Viable Reform Options (November 11, 2008)This article argues that discussions on Security Council reform have not been focusing on issues that would actually make the Council more efficient and representative because countries are working to increase their own power. Looking at the Council’s working methods it proposes changes to some of the procedures, such as abolishing permanent membership, and institutionalizing the presidency. Working methods of the Council are as important as membership, but few proposals have included substantial changes to make the Council more inclusive and transparent. (American Diplomacy)
A Look at the Transitional Approach to Security Council Reform (June 24, 2008)The transitional approach to Security Council reform means that UN members would agree on basic reforms and adapt these agreements later on at a conference. Countries have not been able to decide on the timeframe for a review conference or on the proposals for the transitional reform approach because New Zealand, Germany and others fear that the initial basic reforms would become permanent. (Center for UN Reform Education) Between Enlargement and Reform - The UN Security Council: Choices for Change (May 2008) This article focuses on two different debates of Security Council (SC) reform. The quantitative theory wants equal representation of different regions in the SC. The qualitative theory, however, believes that countries who contribute the most to maintaining international peace and security should be permanent members of the SC. The author supports the quantitative theory because it promotes greater regional involvement instead of the interests of a single country. (Dag Hammarskjold Foundation) Reform of the Security Council (April 2008) This Center for UN Reform Education article reviews Security Council reform proposals from 1991-2008. The article notes that UN member states such as Italy and Pakistan cite the need for consensus to stall the reform process, and prevent regional rivals from gaining seats at the Council. Furthermore, previous efforts to increase the openness of the Council have backfired, as permanent members move the decision-making process to informal closed meeting rooms adjacent to the Security Council chambers. 2007Security Council Accused of Overstepping Bounds (April 12, 2007)Veering from its traditional agenda of preserving international peace and security, the UN Security Council plans to hold a meeting to discuss the issue of climate change. The Group of 77 and the Non-Aligned Movement have denounced this decision as evidence of the SC's "ever-increasing encroachment" on the mandates of the UN's other main bodies. Citing the UN Charter, they argue that the Council should only "come into action when there are actual threats to peace or breaches of the peace." (Inter Press Service) Security Council Reform: a Transitional Approach (December 3, 2007)Member states have agreed that the UN Security Council must become more representative, efficient and transparent to be seen as more legitimate, yet a number disagree on how this reform should occur. Among various proposals from countries, the GA appointed facilitators to conduct consultations about the Council's reform. The facilitators main point consists of adding a mandatory review clause, which demands that after a couple of years, the Council has to review its reform. (UN Chronicle) Cuba Opposes Greater Power to UN Security Council (November 13, 2007)During a UN General Assembly (GA) meeting on Security Council Reform, Cuba called for a more democratic, representative, responsible and effective Council. Cuba's Ambassador Rodrigo Malmiera argues that the Council suffers from a lack of representation from developing countries. The Council does not represent the world's contemporary realities, raising questions about its legitimacy representative and procedures. Malmiera called for greater involvement of non-permanent members in the Council's agenda, as well as membership reform. He also expressed apprehension about the Council's jurisdiction and working methods, such as the selection of Council agenda items. (Prensa Latina) UN Reform, Including SC Expansion Not End in Itself - Russia Envoy (November 13, 2007)Russia, one of the five permanent members with veto power, declared at a General Assembly meeting that Security Council reform discussions should preserve the "foundations" of the United Nations. According to Vitaly Churkin, Russia's UN Representative, the Council should only expand if it can also become more effective. Even though Churkin expressed a willingness to work with non-Council members, in order to continue further peacekeeping improvements, his speech did not seem to favor the Council's enlargement. (Itar-Tass) General Assembly Launches New Effort to Tackle Divisive Issue of Security Council Reform (April 20, 2007)The UN General Assembly issued a report on Security Council reform, proposing that UN member states consider a temporary expansion of Security Council membership. All previous attempts at reform have failed for lack of agreement on size and composition of an expanded Council, due to national and regional rivalries. The report says that reform should increase opportunities for countries to serve as members on the Council and should increase involvement with the Council's work whilst not serving. (Associated Press) 2006UN Security Council Edicts Challenged (October 26, 2006)This Inter Press Service article analyzes permanent member's domination and influence at the UN Security Council. The author denounces action driven by national interests and the "double standards" of the Council's resolutions, which allow some countries to possess nuclear weapons whilst forbidding others. Citing the endorsement of the Iraq occupation by the 15 members of the Security Council, the author comments on the UN inability to prevent powerful nations, such as the US, to dictate their will. The article concludes that the disregard for international law and double standards call into question the legitimacy of the top UN body. 2005Security Council Reform Debate Ends Without Agreement (November 12, 2005)Disputes over permanent membership once again blocked UN member states from reaching consensus on Security Council reform. While the five permanent members consider the debate closed, ambassadors from countries seeking permanent seats said they might bring the issue to a vote in the General Assembly. (Voice of America) Like Fixing the Weather, Council Reform Eludes UN (September 19, 2005)According to David Malone, a former Canadian UN ambassador, Security Council reform failed at the UN summit because "most countries adopted a fairly self-interested position on the subject." French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin said that he hoped that the African countries and the G-4 could reach an agreement by the end of the year. But asked if Council reform was dead in the foreseeable future, Pakistan's UN Ambassador Munir Akram said: "It's on life support." (Reuters) Annan Acknowledges Delays in UN Council Reform (August 11, 2005)Acknowledging the deadlock over Security Council expansion, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has extended the target deadline from September to December 2005 for member states to reach an agreement. Annan says he would like to see a provision in the summit's outcome document committing states to decide on Security Council reform by the end of the year. (Reuters) Japan Ups Aid by $10bn (July 8, 2005)At the Group of Eight summit in Gleneagles, Japan announced that it would sizably increase its foreign aid budget by $10 billion over a five year period. Japan's current official development assistance rate lies at 0.19% of gross national income, way below the UN's 0.7% target. The decision to increase aid is likely a move to "make the country's presence felt as it seeks to win a permanent seat on the UN Security Council," says Finance24.
The UNDP was founded on the 22nd of November 1965 with the merger of the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance or EPTA and the United Nations Special Fund. The rationale was to "avoid duplication of [their] activities". The EPTA was to help the economic and political aspects of underdeveloped countries while the Special Fund was to enlarge the scope of UN technical assistance.
UNDP" redirects here. For the South Korean political party, see United New Democratic Party. For the Cameroon group, see National Union for Democracy and Progress (Cameroon). United Nations Development Programme Flag of the UNDP. AbbreviationUNDPFormation1965TypeProgrammeLegal statusActiveHeadquarters New York City ( International territory) Head Helen ClarkParent organization ECOSOC[1]Website www.undp.orgThe United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the United Nations' global development network. Headquartered in New York City, UNDP advocates for change and connects countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. It provides expert advice, training, and grant support to developing countries, with increasing emphasis on assistance to the least developed countries. The status of UNDP is that of an executive board within the United Nations General Assembly. The UNDP Administrator is the third highest-ranking official of the United Nations after the United Nations Secretary-General and Deputy Secretary-General.[2] To accomplish the MDGs and encourage global development, UNDP focuses on poverty reduction, HIV/AIDS, democratic governance, energy and environment, social development, and crisis prevention and recovery. UNDP also encourages the protection of human rights and the empowerment of women in all of its programmes. The UNDP Human Development Report Office also publishes an annual Human Development Report (since 1990) to measure and analyse developmental progress. In addition to a global Report, UNDP publishes regional, national, and local Human Development Reports.[3] UNDP is funded entirely by voluntary contributions from member nations. The organization has country offices in 177 countries, where it works with local governments to meet development challenges and develop local capacity. Additionally, the UNDP works internationally to help countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Currently, the UNDP is one of the main UN agencies involved in the development of the Post-2015 Development Agenda. UNDP operates in 177 countries, working with nations on their own solutions to global and national development challenges. As they develop local capacity, they draw on the people of UNDP and its wide range of partners.[4] FoundingThe UNDP was founded on the 22nd of November 1965 with the merger of the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance or EPTA and the United Nations Special Fund.[5] The rationale was to "avoid duplication of [their] activities". The EPTA was to help the economic and political aspects of underdeveloped countries while the Special Fund was to enlarge the scope of UN technical assistance.[6][7] BudgetIn 2013, UNDP’s entire budget was approximately 5 billion USD.[8] FunctionsUNDP’s offices and staff are on the ground in 177 countries, working with governments and local communities to help them find solutions to global and national development challenges. UNDP links and coordinates global and national efforts to achieve the goals and national development priorities laid out by host countries. UNDP focuses primarily on five developmental challenges: Democratic governanceUNDP supports national democratic transitions by providing policy advice and technical support, improving institutional and individual capacity within countries, educating populations about and advocating for democratic reforms, promoting negotiation and dialogue, and sharing successful experiences from other countries and locations. UNDP also supports existing democratic institutions by increasing dialogue, enhancing national debate, and facilitating consensus on national governance programmes. Poverty reductionThis section relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources. (December 2013)UNDP helps countries develop strategies to combat poverty by expanding access to economic opportunities and resources, linking poverty programmes with countries’ larger goals and policies, and ensuring a greater voice for the poor. UNDP also works at the macro level to reform trade, encourage debt relief and foreign investment, and ensure the poorest of the poor benefit from globalisation. On the ground, UNDP sponsors developmental pilot projects, promotes the role of women in development, and coordinates efforts between governments, NGOs, and outside donors. In this way, UNDP works with local leaders and governments to provide opportunities for impoverished people to create businesses and improve their economic condition. The UNDP International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG)[1] in Brasília, Brazil expands the capacities of developing countries to design, implement and evaluate socially inclusive development projects. IPC-IG is a global forum for South-South policy dialogue and learning, having worked with more than 7,000 officials from more than 50 countries. A 2013 evaluation of the UNDP’s poverty reduction efforts states that the UNDP has effectively supported national efforts to reduce poverty, by helping governments make policy changes that benefit the poor.[9] Nevertheless, the same evaluation also states there is a strong need for better measurement and monitoring of the impacts of the UNDP's work.[10] The UNDP’s Strategic Plan 2014-2017 incorporates the recommendations of this poverty evaluation.[11] Crisis prevention and recoveryUNDP works to reduce the risk of armed conflicts or disasters, and promote early recovery after crisis have occurred. UNDP works through its country offices to support local government in needs assessment, capacity development, coordinated planning, and policy and standard setting. Examples of UNDP risk reduction programmes include efforts to control small arms proliferation, strategies to reduce the impact of natural disasters, and programmes to encourage use of diplomacy and prevent violence. Recovery programmes include disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants, demining efforts, programmes to reintegrate displaced persons, restoration of basic services, and transitional justice systems for countries recovering from warfare. Environment and EnergyAs the poor are disproportionately affected by environmental degradation and lack of access to clean, affordable water, sanitation and energy services, UNDP seeks to address environmental issues in order to improve developing countries’ abilities to develop sustainably, increase human development and reduce poverty. UNDP works with countries to strengthen their capacity to address global environmental issues by providing innovative policy advice and linking partners through environmentally sensitive development projects that help poor people build sustainable livelihoods. UNDP’s environmental strategy focuses on effective water governance including access to water supply and sanitation, access to sustainable energy services, Sustainable land management to combat desertification and land degradation, conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and policies to control emissions of harmful pollutants and ozone-depleting substances. UNDP's Equator Initiative office biennially offers the Equator Prize to recognize outstanding indigenous community efforts to reduce poverty through the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and thus making local contributions to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). HIV/AIDSHIV/AIDS is a big issue in today's society and UNDP works to help countries prevent further spreading and reduce its impact, convening The Global Commission on HIV and the Law which reported in 2012.[12] Hub for Innovative PartnershipsMajor programmes underway are:[13] Human Development ReportSince 1990, the UNDP has annually published the Human Development Report, which includes topics on Human Development and the annual Human Development Index.[3] EvaluationThe UNDP spends about 0.2% of its budget on internal evaluation of the effectiveness of its programmes.[14] The UNDP’s Evaluation Office is a member of the UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) which brings together all the units responsible for evaluation in the UN system. Currently the UNEG has 43 members and 3 observers.[15] UN co-ordination roleUNDP plays a significant co-ordination role for the UN’s activities in the field of development. This is mainly executed through its leadership of the UN Development Group and through the Resident Co-ordinator System. United Nations Development GroupThe United Nations Development Group (UNDG) was created by the Secretary General in 1997, to improve the effectiveness of UN development at the country level. The UNDG brings together the operational agencies working on development. The Group is chaired by the Administrator of UNDP. UNDP also provides the Secretariat to the Group. The UNDG develops policies and procedures that allow member agencies to work together and analyse country issues, plan support strategies, implement support programmes, monitor results and advocate for change. These initiatives increase UN impact in helping countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), including poverty reduction. 32 UN agencies are members of the UNDG. The Executive Committee consists of the four "founding members": UNICEF, UNFPA, WFP and UNDP. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is an ex-officio member of the Executive Committee. Resident coordinator systemThe Resident Coordinator (RC) system co-ordinates all organizations of the United Nations system dealing with operational activities for development in the field. The RC system aims to bring together the different UN agencies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of operational activities at the country level. Resident Coordinators, who are funded, appointed and managed by UNDP, lead UN country teams in more than 130 countries and are the designated representatives of the Secretary-General for development operations. Working closely with national governments, Resident Coordinators and country teams advocate the interests and mandates of the UN drawing on the support and guidance of the entire UN family.It is now coordinated by the UNDG.[16] ControversiesNSA surveillanceDocuments of Edward Snowden showed in December 2013 that British and American intelligence agencies surveillance targets with America's National Security Agency (NSA) included organisations such as the United Nations Development Programme, the UN's children's charity Unicef and Médecins Sans Frontières and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).[17] CriticismThe UNDP has been criticised by members of its staff and the Bush administration of the United States for irregularities in its finances in North Korea. Artjon Shkurtaj claimed that he had found forged US dollars in the Programmes safe while the staff were paid in Euros. The UNDP denied any wrongdoing, and keeping improper accounts.[18] Disarmament and controversyIn mid-2006, as first reported by Inner City Press[19] and then by The New Vision,[20] UNDP halted its disarmament programmes in the Karamoja region of Uganda in response to human rights abuses in the parallel forcible disarmament programmes carried out by the Uganda People's Defence Force. AdministratorThe UNDP Administrator has the rank of an Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations. While the Administrator is often referred to as the third highest-ranking official in the UN (after the UN Secretary General and the UN Deputy Secretary General), this has never been formally codified. In addition to his or her responsibilities as head of UNDP, the Administrator is also the Chair of the UN Development Group.[21] The position of Administrator is appointed by the Secretary-General of the UN and confirmed by the General Assembly for a term of four years.[22] Helen Clark, former Prime Minister of New Zealand, is the current Administrator. She was appointed in late March 2009, succeeding Kemal Derviş.[23] The current government of New Zealand strongly supported her nomination, along with Australia, the Pacific Island nations and former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Gordon Brown.[24] The five countries on the UNDP board also have some influence over selection.[citation needed] Current board members are Iran (chair), Haiti, Serbia, the Netherlands and Tanzania.[citation needed] Associate AdministratorDuring meetings of the UN Development Group, which are chaired by the Administrator, UNDP is represented by the Associate Administrator.[citation needed] The position is currently held by Maria Eugenia Casar, appointed on 7 May 2014. Assistant AdministratorsAssistant Administrators of the UNDP, Assistant United Nations Secretary Generals and Directors of the Regional Bureaus are Michael O’Neill (United Kingdom), for Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy; Magdy Martínez-Solimán [a.i.] (Spain), for Bureau of Development Policy; Jordan Ryan (United States), for Bureau of Crisis Prevention and Recovery; Jens Wandel (Denmark), for Bureau of Management;[25] Abdoulaye Mar Dieye (Senegal), for Africa; Sima Sami Bahous (Jordan), for Arab States; Haoliang Xu (China), for Asia & Pacific; Cihan Sultanoğlu (Turkey), for Europe & CIS and Jessica Faieta [a.i.] (Ecuador), for Latin America and the Caribbean.[26] Previous AdministratorsThe first administrator of the UNDP was Paul G. Hoffman, former head of the Economic Cooperation Administration which administered the Marshall Plan. Other holders of the position have included: Bradford Morse, former Republican congressman from Massachusetts; William Draper, venture capitalist and friend of George H.W. Bush who saw one of the UN system's major achievements, the Human Development Report, introduced during his tenure; Mark Malloch Brown, who was previously Vice President of External Affairs at the World Bank and subsequently became UN Deputy Secretary General. Kemal Derviş, a former finance minister of Turkey and senior World Bank official, was the previous UNDP Administrator. Derviş started his four-year term on 15 August 2005. Goodwill AmbassadorsUNDP, along with other UN agencies, has long enlisted the voluntary services and support of prominent individuals as Goodwill Ambassadors to highlight these causes. Their fame helps amplify the urgent and universal message of human development and international cooperation, helping to accelerate achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. They articulate the UNDP development philosophy and programmes of self-reliant opportunities and motivate people to act in the interest of improving their own lives and those of their fellow citizens. Global AmbassadorsSee also
UNDG Mandates (TCPR/QCPR) The UN Development Group derives many of its mandates from the Comprehensive Policy Review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system, a General Assembly resolution that serves as an important instrument for the monitoring and the assessment of UN development operations. This General Assembly resolution responds to the mandate defined by: (i) the General Assembly which establishes key system-wide policy orientations for the development cooperation and country-level modalities of the United Nations system; and (ii) the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) which provides coordination and guidance to the UN system to ensure that those policies are implemented. The resolution provides an opportunity to consider the role of UN development assistance from an integrated, long-term perspective. Previously, the resolution was negotiated every three years. In 2008 the General Assembly decided to make the resolution quadrennial, meaning that the next resolution will be negotiated in 2011. More information about the Comprehensive Policy Review is available here.
Progress in the implementation of General Assembly resolution 62/208 on the triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system by: ECOSOC 22 July 2009 Draft resolution (E/2009/L.18) submitted by the Vice-President of the Economic and Social Council. Adopted by consensus 22 July 2009. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 2007 14 March 2008 General Assembly resolution 62/208: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 19 Dec. 2007 without a vote. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 2004 17 August 2005 General Assembly resolution 59/250: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 22 Dec. 2004 without a vote. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 2001 6 March 2002 General Assembly resolution 56/201: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 21 Dec. 2001 without a vote. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 1998 25 February 1999 General Assembly resolution 53/192: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 15 Dec. 1998 without a vote. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 1995 16 February 1996 General Assembly resolution 50/120: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 20 Dec. 1995 without a vote. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 1992 11 May 1993 General Assembly resolution 47/199: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 22 Dec. 1992 without a vote. Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review 1989 December 1989 General Assembly resolution 44/211: Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. Adopted 22 Dec. 1989 without a vote.
Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review-QCPROverview The quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) is the primary policy instrument of the General Assembly to define the way the UN development system operates to support programme countries in their development efforts. In the fall of 2012, the General Assembly will give new policy directions to improve UN system support to developing countries as a result of its first quadrennial review (QCPR) of UN operational activities for development. Scope The quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) deals with issues of funding UN operational activities for development, the functioning of the UN development system and the development effectiveness of the work of the UN system for development. Since 1980, the comprehensive policy review has been conducted every three years. In 2008, Member States decided to change the comprehensive policy review to a quadrennial cycle, notably to ensure that the review guides the development of strategic plans of UN system organizations. Implementing the QCPR is binding for UN entities that report to GA, including 11 Funds and Programmes, 6 research & training institutions (UNICRI, UNIDIR, UNITAR, UNRISD, UNSSC, UNU) and 3 other entities (UNAIDS, UNISDR, UNOPS). The QCPR resolution also provides guidance to the specialized agencies. Some specialized agencies have decided to report to their governing bodies on the implementation of the GA guidance, as requested by the QCPR. Issues and process The QCPR process also provides an important opportunity to Member States to engage in a dialogue on how to adapt UN operational activities to the changing global development cooperation context. The Secretary-General facilitates the QCPR process by providing Member States with impartial, balanced and forward-looking analysis on the implementation of existing policies. Advanced, unedited versions of the two Secretary-General reports for the 2012 QCPR were issued in beginning of June to inform the 2012 substantive session of the Economic and Social Council: - Analytical report on the implementation of the 2007 triennial comprehensive policy review (TCPR)
- Analytical report on funding of operational activities for development of the United Nations system for 2010
The two SG reports synthesize a substantial amount of analytical/evaluative evidence to support the assessment of the current state of operational activities for development of the UN system. These analytical preparations comprised nine background studies and reports, four global online surveys, seven programme country visits, a detailed analysis of the UN development system’s funding architecture and extensive consultations with key stakeholders, all initiated by DESA and its partners as part of the QCPR preparatory process. The nine background studies for the QCPR provide in-depth analysis in areas such as the Resident Coordinator system, the UNDAF process, the harmonization of business practices, results-based strategic planning and management, gender equality and women’s empowerment, transition countries, as well as examining emerging policy issues likely to impact the work of the UN development system in the 2013-2016 QCPR cycle. These studies are supported by four surveys of programme countries, UN Resident Coordinators and country teams, UN Operational Management Teams and civil society organizations working closely with UN entities at the country level. The SG’s funding report, in addition to providing a detailed breakdown of funding contributions and expenditures of the UN development system, broadens the analysis with more disaggregated reporting on issues such as predictability of funding flows, breakdown of non-core contributions by funding streams and cost recovery of non-core resources to the UN development system. Other key analytical inputs to the 2012 QCPR will be the report of the independent evaluation of ‘delivering-as-one’ and a report commissioned by the SG on a comprehensive review of the existing institutional framework for system-wide evaluation of UN operational activities for development. Building on the deliberations of the Operational Activities Segment of ECOSOC in July 2012, the Secretary-General will submit two follow-up reports for the QCPR to the General Assembly in mid-August and mid-September respectively, with recommendations to strengthen the coherence, effectiveness and efficiency of UN operational activities for development. The SG reports and the substantive materials of the QCPR preparatory process will serve as key reference points to the General Assembly in adopting a QCPR resolution that will establish policy directives for the UN development system covering the 2013-2016 QCPR cycle. Further reading GA resolution 62/208: Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review
GA resolution 64/289: System-wide coherence
ECOSOC resolution 2011/7: progress in the implementation of TCPR
Highlight of the QCPR Report 2012
22/2013Discussion Paper A Resolution for a Quiet Revolution Taking the United Nations to Sustainable Development ‘Beyond Aid’ Pio Wennubst Timo M…
Since the UN General Assembly began debating Security Council reform in 1993, several models have been put forward as viable options and several countries have put themselves forward as candidates for permanent membership. This page provides background information on Security Council Reform. The Security Council is not representative of the geopolitical realities of the modern world. Both Africa and Latin America lack a permanent seat on the Council, while Europe is overrepresented and Asia is underrepresented. These problems are not easily addressed because the Permanent Five members (P5) of the Council do not want to see their power diminished. As a result, little progress has been made since 1993 in spite of the number of proposals that have been suggested. The central issues in Council reform are membership, transparency and working methods, and the veto. The P5 generally opposes any expansion of membership of the Council that would diminish their power though they occasionally support some countries bids. As negotiations are currently stalled over membership expansion, P5 countries have supported bids for membership by some countries. Most recently, the US gave its support to India. France has backed Africa for a permanent seat. The "G4" countries have put themselves forward as the most serious candidates for permanent membership in the Council. Brazil, Germany, India and Japan have positioned themselves as leaders within the UN, but have failed to garner enough support - or quell the opposition - to ascend as permanent members. Other blocs of states have put forward reform proposals. During the 1990's, the Coffee Club opposed adding countries as permanent members, and instead proposed that members be elected on a regional basis to create more parity in representation. This effort was re-energized in the mid-2000's by Italy under the name Uniting for Consensus, and it has been actively working towards regionally based reform. Another group, self-identified as the Small Five (S-5), has put forward a series of proposals for Council reform as well. The S-5 (Costa Rica, Jordan, Lichtenstein, Singapore and Switzerland) advocates for more transparency and coordination between the Security Council and the General Assembly and Economic and Social committees. The proposal also included some guidelines on the use of the veto. As a separate bloc, the African Union has put forward a suggestion to expand the Council, giving Africa and Latin America permanent seats and increasing representation for all regional areas. The expansion of the council would also include giving the power of the veto to new permanent members. In December 2004, Secretary-General Kofi Annan proposed changes to the Security Council as part of the High Level Panel's Report on Threats, Challenges and Change. In March 2005, Annan reiterated the two suggested plans, known as Model A and Model B. Despite his attempts to push forward reform, neither plan was accepted by all of the factions in play. While the issue of membership seems to hold observers' attention in the media, the issues of transparency and working methods and veto power are just as important. Currently, only permanent members have veto power and they are unlikely to give up this right. Lack of transparency in the Council's working methods place emphasis on how the Council goes about making decisions and the lack of information that they are required to provide to other parts of the UN. Furthermore, the subsidiary bodies of the Council do not include UN members unless they are members of the Council at the time. As a result, many countries that have not served, or are not currently serving, on the Council are being left out of the decision-making process.
GPF PerspectiveGPF Comment on Security Council Reform
The debate on Security Council reform has been raging for over 15 years in the UN General Assembly. Recently, the discussions moved into a formal intergovernmental negotiation and the temperature has been rising. At odds are the "G-4" aspirants who hope to gain new permanent seats and the opposition grouping known as "Uniting for Consensus." This GPF page provides an analysis and posts a number of key documents from the latest round. Towards a Democratic Reform of the UN Security Council (July 13, 2005)James Paul and Céline Nahory argue that adding more permanent members to the Security Council would enlarge a discredited oligarchy rather than build for a democratic future. They also oppose the addition of elected members, arguing that an expanded Council would be too large to function effectively and not substantially more representative. Instead, they propose a process of stronger regional representation as a future-oriented approach that can develop in stages and without the headache of Charter change. (Global Policy Forum) GPF Paper by James Paul on Security Council Reform (February 1995) Additional BackgroundUN Security Council Reform Current Developments (Summer 2009)
This report provides a current background of positions on Security Council Reform. It covers the major hurdles that have yet to be overcome as well as the positions of the main blocs working on the issue. ( Istituto Affari Internazionali)
Small Five Elements for Reflection (April 2009) This document compiled by the S5 explains the working methods reforms they support to create more transparency and efficiency in the Council. (Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the UN)
Models and ProposalsUniting for Consensus Proposal on Security Council Reform (April 2009)This is the updated Uniting for Consensus (UfC) proposal that is an extension of the 2005 UfC tabled draft resolution. (Permanent Mission of Italy to the United Nations)
Small-5 Group on Reform of Working Methods of Security Council (April 7, 2009) Ambassador Peter Maurer of Switzerland presented this brief statement on behalf of the Small-5 Group (Liechtenstein, Singapore, Switzerland, Jordan and Costa Rica). He emphasized that reform of the Council should be extended beyond membership change to include reform of the Council's working methods. The S-5 wants change in the way the Council meets, the way it conducts its business, the way it interacts with the General Assembly and the means by which it is transparent and responsive to the international community. The S-5, which has been working for several years, has submitted a formal proposal and requests Council action on it.(Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the UN) Competing Model: A Security Council with 20 Members (February 1, 2006) A non-profit policy research organization called Center for UN Reform Education has put forward an alternative model to the many proposals introduced in the past on Security Council expansion. The plan, called Model X, enlarges the Council to 20 members by adding five four-year renewable term seats - as opposed to the 9 or 11 new members previously proposed. Also, Model X groups the member states in a way that Africa, Asia, Europe, Americas and the Pacific would each have five seats, thereby ensuring more balanced representation from each continental region. So far, the Council's great powers have stalled any attempts towards Security Council reform. In response to draft resolutions tabled by the G-4 and the African Union, Uniting for Consensus has tabled its alternative proposal. The draft resolution proposes adding 10 non-permanent members immediately eligible for re-election to the Security Council, leaving formalities of re-election and rotation to regional groups. Tabled African Union Draft Resolution on Security Council Reform (July 14, 2005)Also responding to the G-4 resolution, the African Union has tabled its proposal calling for 11 additional members on the Security Council, with Africa gaining two permanent seats and five non-permanent seats. The AU also recommends that new permanent members gain all existing privileges - including veto power. Tabled G-4 Draft Resolution on Security Council Reform (July 6, 2005)Brazil, Germany, India and Japan have tabled their draft "framework" resolution calling for Security Council enlargement to 25 members, including six additional permanent seats. In a desperate attempt to secure permanent membership, the Group of Four (G-4) had accepted to forego their right of veto for at least 15 years. The less contentious proposals on the Council's working methods have more of a chance to succeed than membership expansion plans. Also see previous versions of June 8 and May 13. Italy's Regional Model (April 2005)Opposing new permanent members - and Germany in particular - Italy proposes to add 10 permanent regional seats that each group would manage independently with its own principles and mechanisms to ensure regional representation rather than a national occupation of their seats. United for Consensus' Green Model (April 2005)In the Green Model, United for Consensus proposes to expand the Security Council with an additional 10 elected seats. All 20 elected members would serve in the Council for two year terms and be eligible for re-election. United for Consensus' Blue Model (April 2005)The Blue Model foresees longer-term seats while at the same time adding regular two-year elected seats to the current ones. Longer-term seats would be elected for three or four years and might run for re-election. Excerpt of Kofi Annan's Report on UN Reform: In Larger Freedom (March 21, 2005)In his report on UN reform, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan only touches very briefly upon Security Council reform, and does not recommend specific action on this vital aspect of UN reform. Annan urges member states to consider both models A and B, as outlined by the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, and calls on states to reach a decision on Security Council enlargement before the summit in September 2005. (United Nations) OtherReports of the General Assembly Open-Ended Working GroupProvides all of the annual reports here for the Open-Ended Working Group Working on Security Council Reform in the General Assembly. Security Council Reform - An Overview of Member States' Positions (December 8, 2008)This chart by the Center for UN Reform Education outlines the positions of various UN member states on issues relating to Council reform, including regional seats, veto reform, and preferences for timing of intergovernmental negotiations.
United Nations Development Group From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia United Nations Development Group AbbreviationUNDGFormation1997TypeGroupLegal statusActive Head Helen ClarkParent organization ECOSOCWebsite www.undg.orgThe United Nations Development Group (UNDG) is a consortium from the result of UN reform, created by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in 1997, to improve the effectiveness of UN development activities at the country level. Its strategic priorities are to respond to the Triennial comprehensive policy review (TCPR) - which became in 2008 the Quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) - and global development priorities, as well as to ensure the UN development system becomes more internally focused and coherent. The UNDG strategic priorities give direction to UNDG members efforts at the global, regional and country level to facilitate a step change in the quality and impact of UN support at the country level.[1] The QCPR of the operational system of the United Nations is a process and a United Nations General Assembly resolution by which the members of the United Nations General Assembly review the coherence effectiveness and funding of UN development programmes, funds, and specialised agencies of the UN operational system for development. UNDG brings together 32 UN agencies and groups, plus five observers working on various and/or similar development issues from the UNDP to the ILO.[2] Currently, the UNDG is one of the main UN actors involved in the development of the Post-2015 Development Agenda.[citation needed] By 1997, there were calls within the United Nations to draw all UN agencies working on development issues together; for the many UN Development Programmes, Funds, and Specialised Agencies were encroaching upon each other's activities. An initial proposal was to merge the UNICEF, the World Food Programme and the UNFPA into the UNDP. Finally, then Secretary General Kofi Annan worked to form the UNDG and won praise from then UNDP Administrator James Speth. Members of the UNDG[2]Observers[2].United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) Leadership and organizationLeadershipThe United Nations Economic and Social Council and the United Nations General Assembly provide oversight and mandates for the UNDG.[3][4] The UNDG is overseen by the Economic and Financial Committee (Second Committee) of the General Assembly. The UNDG has provided reports such as the Comprehensive statistical analysis of the financing of operational activities for development of the UN system for 2006 and the Comprehensive statistical analysis of the financing of operational activities for development of the UN system for 2007 to the General Assembly.[5] The UNDG's chairperson is the UNDP's Administrator. Since its inception, the following have been the Chair of the UNDG:[6] Executive CommitteeThe Executive Committee comprises the four founding agencies—the UNDP, the UNFPA, the UNICEF and the WFP (The High Commissioner for Human Rights is an Ex-Officio member of the Committee).[7] UNDG Advisory GroupUnder Kemal Derviş' leadership, an "Advisory Group", which provides the UNDG Chair with advice and guidance on managing the operational dimensions of the UNDG and the Resident Coordinator System, was established.[3][8] In 2009, the non-rotational members of the advisory group were: the FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, UNHCR, WFP, WHO and UNIDO. The rotational members (for a period of one year, as of 1 August 2009) were: the UNAIDS, DESA and the Economic Commission for Europe (representing all five Regional Commissions).[9] OrganizationDevelopment Coordination OfficeThe UN Development Operations Coordination Office (DOCO) is a key component within the UNDG, promoting social and economic progress by providing support. It was key part of UNDG's formation in 1997, uniting the UN system and improve the quality of its development assistance. Coordination leads to more strategic UN support for national plans and priorities, makes operations more efficient, reduces transaction costs for governments, and ultimately helps people attain the Millennium Development Goals and other internationally agreed development objectives.[10] For more about DOCO's work, see its official page. See also
|
