[WSIS CS-Plenary] fyi: US - Millenium Summit+5: washington post

[magaly pazello]

Bolton's "work" at UN in NY... how to become the world worst...

The US position about poverty and governance as well are reflected in 
the WSIS documents on financing...

magaly
---------------------------------
U.S. Wants Changes In U.N. Agreement

By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 25, 2005; A01

UNITED NATIONS, Aug. 24 -- Less than a month before world leaders 
arrive in New York for a world summit on poverty and U.N. reform, the 
Bush administration has thrown the proceedings in turmoil with a call 
for drastic renegotiation of a draft agreement to be signed by 
presidents and prime ministers attending the event.

The United States has only recently introduced more than 750 amendments 
that would eliminate new pledges of foreign aid to impoverished 
nations, scrap provisions that call for action to halt climate change 
and urge nuclear powers to make greater progress in dismantling their 
nuclear arms. At the same time, the administration is urging members of 
the United Nations to strengthen language in the 29-page document that 
would underscore the importance of taking tougher action against 
terrorism, promoting human rights and democracy, and halting the spread 
of the world's deadliest weapons.

Next month's summit, an unusual meeting at the United Nations of heads 
of state, was called by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan to 
reinvigorate efforts to fight poverty and to take stronger steps in the 
battles against terrorism and genocide. The leaders of 175 nations are 
expected to attend and sign the agreement, which has been under 
negotiation for six months.

But Annan's effort to press for changes has been hampered by 
investigations into fraud in the U.N. oil-for-food program and 
revelations of sexual misconduct by U.N. peacekeepers.

The United Nations originally scheduled the Sept. 14 summit as a 
follow-up to the 2000 Millennium Summit, which produced commitments by 
U.N. members to meet deadlines over the next 15 years aimed at reducing 
poverty, preventable diseases and other scourges of the world's poor. 
But the Bush administration is seeking to focus attention on the need 
to streamline U.N. bureaucracy, establish a democracy fund, strengthen 
the U.N. human rights office and support a U.S. initiative to halt the 
trade in weapons of mass destruction.

The U.S. amendments call for striking any mention of the Millennium 
Development Goals, and the administration has publicly complained that 
the document's section on poverty is too long. Instead, the United 
States has sought to underscore the importance of the Monterrey 
Consensus, a 2002 summit in Mexico that focused on free-market reforms, 
and required governments to improve accountability in exchange for aid 
and debt relief.

The proposed U.S. amendments, contained in a confidential 36-page 
document obtained by The Washington Post, have been presented this week 
to select envoys. The U.N. General Assembly's president, Jean Ping of 
Gambia, is organizing a core group of 20 to 30 countries, including the 
United States and other major powers, to engage in an intensive final 
round of negotiations in an attempt to strike a deal.

"Now it is maybe time to go on some key issues where we still have 
controversies and negotiate on these key issues," he said Tuesday.

The proposed changes, submitted by U.S. Ambassador John R. Bolton, 
touch on virtually every aspect of U.N. affairs and provide a detailed 
look at U.S. concerns about the world body's future. They underscore 
U.S. efforts to impose greater oversight of U.N. spending and to 
eliminate any reference to the International Criminal Court. The 
administration also opposes language that urges the five permanent 
members of the Security Council not to cast vetoes to halt genocide, 
war crimes or ethnic cleansing.

Russia, Pakistan and several other developing countries have also 
introduced plans for changes in the power of some U.N. bodies.

Bolton and a spokesman did not respond to requests to comment Wednesday.

Some delegates were sympathetic with the approach taken by Bolton, who 
took over as ambassador this month. "I think he just wants to be very 
cautious," said Canada's U.N. ambassador, Allan Rock. "He's coming into 
a situation where there's a [29]-page document on the table, and I 
think he's looking at it very closely and he's concerned that great 
care be taken before his country's name is put to it, and that's quite 
natural."

But the proposals face strong resistance from poorer countries, which 
want the United Nations to focus more on alleviating poverty, 
criticizing U.S. and Israeli military policies in the Middle East, and 
scaling back its propensity to intervene in small countries that abuse 
human rights.

"We are looking at very, very difficult negotiations in the days 
ahead," said Munir Akram, Pakistan's U.N. ambassador. The United States 
has "strong positions, and many of us do have very strongly held 
positions. That's the nature of the game. My only regret is we didn't 
get into the negotiations early enough."

U.S. and U.N. diplomats say that Bolton has indicated in face-to-face 
meetings with foreign delegates that he is prepared to pursue other 
negotiating options if the current process proves cumbersome.

For example, he has suggested that the entire document could be 
scrapped and replaced with a brief statement. He also has indicated 
that the document could be split up by themes, and that nations could 
choose the ones to support, the diplomats said.

In meetings with foreign delegates, Bolton has expressed concern about 
a provision of the agreement that urges wealthy countries, including 
the United States, to contribute 0.7 percent of their gross national 
product in assistance to poor countries. He has also objected to 
language that urges nations to observe a moratorium on nuclear testing 
and to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which the Bush 
administration opposes.

"There seems to be general agreement that we must now undertake the 
more difficult process of open and transparent negotiations to reach 
agreement on those issues," Bolton wrote Wednesday in a confidential 
letter to U.N. envoys. "Time is short. In order to maximize our chances 
of success, I suggest we begin the negotiations immediately, this week 
if possible."

© 2005 The Washington Post Company