Global Policy Forum

By Nick Wadhams

The United States strongly criticized a revised blueprint charting reforms of the United Nations on Tuesday, saying the document is too long, poorly organized and doesn't focus on President Bush's main concerns. Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, speaking on behalf of the European Union, reacted far more favorably. He called the latest draft a good basis for the final document and said he hoped much of it was in its final form.

Diplomats have haggled for weeks over the language of the draft outcome document which is supposed to be approved by world leaders at a U.N. summit next month. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's initial proposal in March has been turned into a draft that is 37 pages long.

The conflicting EU and U.S. statements were not a deal-breaker, since much work is left to be done before the reform package is ready to be put to world leaders. Yet they provided insight into where the two sides agree and disagree, and could foreshadow some of the battles that may erupt as the September deadline nears and tensions heat up over the reforms.

In a round of informal consultations in the U.N. General Assembly, U.S. Deputy Ambassador Anne Patterson said the document, among many other faults, focuses too much on disarmament and not enough on nonproliferation. "The document is too long and not worded in a manner that heads of state normally agree to or endorse," Patterson said. "The development section is over 15 pages long."

Developing countries comprise about two-thirds of the U.N.'s 191 member states and Annan also wants world leaders to take action to meet U.N. development goals including cutting extreme poverty by half by 2015. But Patterson said the section strays from previous commitments on how to approach development, such as emphasizing the partnership between the developed and developing world, and needed to be drastically shortened and rewritten. Jones Parry, on the other hand, said much of the section on development worked well, but it needed to stay focused on ambitious goals of raising development spending by national governments.

Among the most significant U.S. demands, Patterson said the document doesn't reflect the American belief that the biggest threats to world peace are proliferation and terrorists getting their hands on weapons of mass destruction.

She said the United States would not support the current language on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which the Bush administration opposes. The document urges all nations to become party to it and says they should maintain a moratorium on testing until it enters into force. "The nonproliferation and disarmament section falls well short of what the U.S. can accept," Patterson said.