In
UN
GA, Ban's
"Coup" Voted
Down 98-48 As
He Won't
Disclose
Funding
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
April 9 -- The
vote against
giving UN
Secretary
General the
"Change
Management"
powers he
wants grew
more
pronounced
Monday in the
UN General
Assembly,
where a
US-sponsored
pro-Ban
amendment was
voted down
with 48 in
favor (up one
from the Budget
Committee
vote on April
2), 97
against (up
nine from
April 2), with
four
abstentions.
Delegates
told
Inner City
Press that
while most of
the increased
opposition to
Ban's
Change
Management
power-grab or
"coup"
represented
countries
which had not
been present
on April 2, it
was
significant
that what they
called the US
"lobbying" had
not had
success.
To
many, the
vote was not a
set-back for
Ban's
so-called
reform, but
rather an
expression of
democratization
at the UN: an
openly
pro-West
Secretary
General should
not be able to
bypass the
other member
states in the
General
Assembly. That
Ban thought he
could do it,
the analysis
goes,
show him to be
out of touch.
A
senior Fifth
Committee
source early
on April 9
said that
maybe Ban's
new chief of
staff Susana
Malcorra would
come and speak
to the General
Assembly
before the
vote, to try
to sway some
votes. It did
not happen.
Rather, after
the US
amendment was
voted down,
the Group of
77
sponsored
resolution
calling Ban to
account was
passed, 98 in
favor
(up one from
minutes
before), 48
against and
four
abstaining.
Afterward
the
European Union
predicted an
upcoming fight
on the scales
of
assessment,
and US
Ambassador Joe
Torsella,
whose
positions we'd
like to
understand and
be able to
explain in a
non "one-way"
fashion, again
decried the
deferral
of changes
including to
travel. He has
spoken of
interns flying
business
class, and a
proposal for
Ban officials
to fly Economy
class
on flights
below six
hours in a
single
country.
While
some say Ban
can't practice
what he
preaches,
there are
questions
about the size
of delegations
he takes with
him, and why
he won't
routinely
disclose
when he take
non-UN travel
and how it is
not a conflict
of interest.
Only because
the Qatari
President of
the General
Assembly
acknowledged
it was a
confirmation
received by
Inner City
Press that
Ban used a
Qatar
government --
that is, royal
family -- jet.
What has
he flown on
since, and
what will he
fly on in the
future? Change
management,
indeed. Watch
this site.
An
analysis:
again, the
irony here is
that the US
and EU put
their "reform"
-- often
meaning "cost
cutting" --
faith in Ban
Ki-moon,
who is hardly
a reformer and
has for
example
overseen a
$433 million
cost overrun
on the Capital
Master Plan.
It
seems to some
they do not
really
see him as a
reformer --
how could
they? -- but
rather as
someone
they can and
do control.
But the
opposition,
then, is not
between GA
or G77
"bureacracy"
and agile
reform, but
between
whether a
Western
controlled
puppet should
be free to do
what the West
says, or
have to answer
UN democracy
style to other
member
states...
, 
