Global Policy Forum

By Thalif Deen

The United Nations is heading for a political showdown over a landmark declaration to be approved at an upcoming major summit meeting, described by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as potentially ''the largest gathering of world leaders ever.'' The proposed declaration -- labeled "an outcome document" -- is expected to set the development agenda for the next decade, and also propose new measures not only to restructure the world body but also help resolve some of the interminable economic and social problems, including poverty and hunger, plaguing the world's poorer nations. The General Assembly will be meeting here Sep. 14-16.

The strongest criticism of the 37-page outcome document has come from the 132-member Group of 77 (G-77), which represents the overwhelming majority of the 191-nation world body. Ambassador Stafford Neil of Jamaica, chairman of the G-77, has expressed disappointment that the proposed declaration focuses more heavily on the creation of new institutional structures and management reform than "a more expansive treatment" of economic and trade issues. "Given its importance in economic development," he says, trade, debt, science and technology, market access and aid should take priority over reform and restructuring.

According to a wire service report, however, the United States remains critical of the outcome document for the opposite reason: too much attention on trade and economics. Ambassador Anne Patterson, U.S. deputy permanent representative, was quoted as saying that the document is too long "and not worded in a manner that heads of state normally agree to or endorse." "The development section is over 15 pages long," Patterson told a closed door meeting early this week.

Neil shot down several proposals on management reform -- including increased executive power to the U.N. secretary-general -- some of which were called for by a U.S. congressional panel in June this year. In a 174-page report on U.N. reform, the panel made wide-ranging recommendations, including corporate style oversight bodies in the U.N. system, and the creation of more watchdog bodies to track corruption and mismanagement. Also in June, the U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation that would withhold half the U.S. dues, starting in 2007, if the United Nations did not meet some 46 requirements, including the establishment of an office of ethics. Currently, the United States is the largest single contributor to the U.N.'s regular budget, accounting for about 440 million dollars, followed by Japan (346 million dollars) and Germany (154 million dollars).

At the closed door meeting early this week, the G-77 warned that many of the proposals in the outcome document are for the establishment of institutional structures which could have "far-reaching implications, especially for the role of the General Assembly" and the U.N.'s administrative and budgetary committee. "These are subtle attempts to undermine the authority of the General Assembly. We cannot create these bodies without a process of negotiation," an Asian diplomat told IPS. The General Assembly, which comprises all 191 member states, is the U.N.'s highest policy-making body, although the 15-member Security Council wields more power because it has the authority to make war and peace.

The proposals rejected by the G-77 include the creation of an independent audit advisory committee; the establishment of an independent ethics office; the creation of an external expert team to work with the secretary-general on the implementation of reform provisions; and the convening by the president of the General Assembly of a group of U.N. permanent representatives to work with him on management and oversight issues.

The G-77 has also refused to consider a proposal to give additional powers to the secretary-general to re-deploy existing human resources in the U.N. system. "The Group does not accept that the secretary-general should be given broad authority to redeploy posts. The General Assembly has already granted him the flexibility to re-deploy 50 posts, on an experimental basis and report to it on its implementation. We therefore await this report at the upcoming 60th session (of the General Assembly)", the G-77 said. "We reiterate that it is the role of the General Assembly, not the secretary-general, to re-deploy resources to priority areas," it added.

Speaking on behalf of the G-77 and China, Neil says the outcome document, which will be approved by world leaders, should call for an end to the arbitrary and abusive use of non-tariff barriers, including technical standards, which unfairly restrict access of developing countries' products into developed countries' markets. He is also calling for the elimination of export subsidies by rich nations; enhanced market access for goods and services of developing countries in the markets of developed countries; special and differential treatment for developing countries; and corrective measures to address the problem of commodity price volatility.

"There have been encouraging signs with respect to financing for development," Neil said. "We welcome the commitments made, especially by the European Union and others, to increase resources both in the short-and long-term." However, he said, "We believe it is important to reaffirm the long-standing commitment of 0.7 percent target of gross national income (GNI) for official development assistance (ODA) and to urge those which have not yet taken positive steps in this regard to do so to ensure that this target is achieved, preferably by 2015," he added. The proposed declaration does not call for deadlines to meet ODA targets.

Neil also complained that the document does not call for the reform and restructuring of either the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or the World Bank, both of which are heavily weighted in favour of rich donor nations. "Calls for reform (in these two institutions) are seen as subversive and as a challenge to the established order," he said. "Instead, it is at the United Nations, where developing countries have a voice, that trenchant voices -- sometimes threatening voices -- are raised that the United Nations must reform." In some instances, Neil said, making an oblique reference to the United States, "such reform is called for with the proviso that if it is not attained, funding for the United Nations will be withheld."