TyroCity: International Organizations

Introduction to International Financial Institute

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

An international financial institute, World Bank provides developing countries with loans for capital programmes. The bank sets its objective to reduce poverty in these countries. By law, all of its decisions must be guided by a commitment to promote foreign investment, international trade and facilitate capital investment.

In IBRD (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) and the IDA (International Development Association) are two institutions shaping up World Bank which is how it differs from the World Bank Group. The World Bank Group comprises of three more institutions in IFC (International Finance Corporation), MIGA (Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency), and ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes).

Introduction to UNESCO

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

UNESCO works to create the conditions for dialogue among civilizations, cultures and peoples, based upon respect for commonly shared values. It is through this dialogue that the world can achieve global visions of sustainable development encompassing observance of human rights, mutual respect and the alleviation of poverty, all of which are at the heart of UNESCO’S mission and activities.

The broad goals and concrete objectives of the international community – as set out in the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – underpin all UNESCO’s strategies and activities. Thus UNESCO’s unique competencies in education, the sciences, culture and communication and information contribute towards the realization of those goals.

UNESCO’s mission is to contribute to the building of peace, the eradication of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue through education, the sciences, culture, communication and information. The Organization focuses, in particular, on two global priorities:

Africa
Gender equality And on a number of overarching objectives:
Attaining quality education for all and lifelong learning
Mobilizing science knowledge and policy for sustainable development
Addressing emerging social and ethical challenges
Fostering cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue and a culture of peace
Building inclusive knowledge societies through information and communication

The Organization’s history
As early as 1942, in wartime, the governments of the European countries, which were confronting Nazi Germany and its allies, met in the United Kingdom for the Conference of Allied Ministers of Education (CAME). The Second World War was far from over, yet those countries were looking for ways and means to reconstruct their systems of education once peace was restored. Very quickly, the project gained momentum and soon took on a universal note. New governments, including that of the United States, decided to join in.

Upon the proposal of CAME, a United Nations Conference for the establishment of an educational and cultural organization (ECO/CONF) was convened in London from 1 to 16 November 1945. Scarcely had the war ended when the conference opened. It gathered together the representatives of forty-four countries who decided to create an organization that would embody a genuine culture of peace. In their eyes, the new organization must establish the “intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind” and, in so doing, prevent the outbreak of another world war.

At the end of the conference, thirty-seven countries founded the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. The Constitution of UNESCO, signed on 16 November 1945, came into force on 4 November 1946 after ratification by twenty countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, France, Greece, India, Lebanon, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States. The first session of theGeneral Conference of UNESCO was held in Paris from 19 November to 10 December 1946 with the participation of representatives from 30 governments entitled to vote.

The political divisions of the Second World War marked the composition of the founding Member States of UNESCO. It was not until 1951 that Japan and the Federal Republic of Germany became Members, and Spain was accepted in 1953. Other major historical factors, such as the Cold War, the decolonization process and the dissolution of the USSR, also left their trace on UNESCO. The USSR joined UNESCO in 1954 and was replaced by the Russian Federation in 1992 alongside 12 former Soviet republics. Nineteen African states became Members in the 1960s.

As a consequence of its entry into the United Nations, the People’s Republic of China has been the only legitimate representative of China at UNESCO since 1971. The German Democratic Republic was a Member from 1972 to 1990, when it joined the Federal Republic of Germany.

Some countries withdrew from the Organization for political reasons at various points in time, but they have today all rejoined UNESCO. South Africa was absent from 1957 to 1994, the United States of America between 1985 to 2003, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 1986 to 1997 and Singapore from 1986 to 2007.

Origins of UNESCO

The main predecessors of UNESCO were:

The International Committee of Intellectual Co-operation (CICI), Geneva 1922-1946, and its executing agency, the International Institute of Intellectual Co-operation (IICI), Paris, 1925-1946;
The International Bureau of Education (IBE), Geneva, 1925-1968; since 1969 IBE has been part of the UNESCO Secretariat under its own statutes.

UNESCO’s governing bodies

The General Conference

The General Conference consists of the representatives of the States Members of the Organization. It meets every two years, and is attended by Member States and Associate Members, together with observers for non-Member States, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Each country has one vote, irrespective of its size or the extent of its contribution to the budget.

The General Conference determines the policies and the main lines of work of the Organization. Its duty is to set the programs and the budget of UNESCO. It also elects the Members of the Executive Board and appoints, every four years, the Director-General. The working languages of the General Conference are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish.

The Executive Boards

The Executive Board, in a sense, assures the overall management of UNESCO. It prepares the work of the General Conference and sees that its decisions are properly carried out. The functions and responsibilities of the Executive Board are derived primarily from the Constitution and from rules or directives laid down by the General Conference.

Every two years the General Conference assigns specific tasks to the Board. Other functions stem from agreements concluded between UNESCO and the United Nations, the specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations.

Its fifty-eight members are elected by the General Conference. The choice of these representatives is largely a matter of the diversity of the cultures and their geographical origin. Skilful negotiations may be needed before a balance is reached among the different regions of the world in a way that will reflect the universality of the Organization. The Executive Board meets twice a year.

Member States

With the entry of the Faroe Islands to UNESCO as an Associate Member in October 2009, the Organization has now193 Member States and 7 Associate Members.

The Sector for External Relations and Public Information (ERI) and the Africa Department (AFR) ensure liaison with Member States. While AFR covers the Member States from the Africa region, ERI is responsible for relations with the Member States from the four other regions and with Associate Members.

Relations with Member States are also ensured by the Directors and Heads of the UNESCO Regional, Cluster and National Offices.

Most Member States have established Permanent Delegations to UNESCO which, headed by Ambassadors, undertake liaison between the Organization and their governments.

All Member States have established a National Commission for UNESCO. The UNESCO National Commissions are national cooperating bodies set up by the Member States for the purpose of associating their governmental and non-governmental bodies with the work of the Organization.

Member States and Associate Members designate one or several Ministries responsible for relations with UNESCO and/or Ministries in UNESCO’s fields of competence.

UNESCO emphasizes its efforts to involve nationally (Parliamentarians) and locally elected representatives (Cities and Local Authorities) in its action.

The executive branch of the Organization

The Secretariat consists of the Director-General and the Staff appointed by him or her. As of mid-2009, the Secretariat employed around 2,000 civil servants from some 170 countries. The staff is divided into Professional and General Service categories. More than 700 staff members work in UNESCO’s 65 field offices around the world.

Structure of the UNESCO Secretariat

Director-General

Office of the Director-General (ODG)

Programme Sectors:

Education (ED)
Natural Sciences (SC)
Social and Human Sciences (SHS)
Culture (CLT)
Communication and Information (CI)

Support Sectors:

External Relations and Public Information (ERI)
Administration (ADM)

Central Services:

Secretariat of the Governing Bodies (GBS)
Office of International Standards and Legal Affairs (LA)
Internal Oversight Service (IOS)
Ethics Office (ETH)
Bureau of Strategic Planning (BSP)
Bureau of Financial Management (BFM)
Bureau of Human Resources Management (HRM)
Bureau of Field Coordination (BFC)
Africa Department (AFR)
Secretariat of the Félix Houphouët-Boigny Peace Prize (CRP)

The Origin of the UN

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Atlantic Charter – August 14 1941
Washington Declaration – January 1 1942
Moscow Declaration – Oct 30 1943
USSR, US, UK and China
Dumbarton Oaks – August to October 1944
Yalta Conference – February 1945
US, UK and USSR
San Francisco Conference -April 25 1945

The Intent of the Planners

“…all of the nations of the world…must come to the abandonment of the use of force…”
“…the establishment of a wider and permanent system of general security…”
“…the fullest collaboration between all nations in the economic field, with the object of securing for all improved labour standards, economic advancement, and social security.” [Atlantic Charter]

San Francisco Conference - April 25 1945

50 delegations in attendance at the United Nation’s Conference on International Organisation [UNCIO]
UN Charter was signed by all delegations on June 26.
Smaller powers achieved important alterations to the Dumbarton Oaks plan.
The UNGA was given broader powers.
The status of EcoSoc was raised.
Limitations were placed on the powers of the UNSC to call into use military forces of non members of the Security Council, by allowing those non members to attend relevant SC Meetings

International Organizations

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The League of Nations

The United Nations

The U.N.O. and the League of Nations

The Commonwealth of Nations - Commonwealth and its relevance today

The International Court of Justice

UNESCO

ILO

IMF

World Bank

Introduction to International Financial Institute

ICAO

UNICEF

WHO

Description of WHO

UNDP

About UNDP

ASEAN

SAARC

WTO

Introduction to International Civil Aviation Organization

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

A specialized agency of the United Nations, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) was created in 1944 to promote the safe and orderly development of international civil aviation throughout the world. It sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety, security, efficiency and regularity, as well as for aviation environmental protection. The Organization serves as the forum for cooperation in all fields of civil aviation among its 190 Member States.

Vision & Mission
The ICAO or International Civil Aviation Organization is the global forum for civil aviation. ICAO works to achieve its vision of safe, secure and sustainable development of civil aviation through the cooperation of its Member States.
ICAO STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES 2011-2012-2013

As the global forum for cooperation among its Member States and with the world aviation community, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) sets standards and recommended practices for the safe and orderly development of international civil aviation. In its ongoing mission to foster a global civil aviation system that consistently and uniformly operates at peak efficiency and provides optimum safety, security and sustainability, ICAO has established three Strategic Objectives:

Safety – Enhance global civil aviation safety
Security – Enhance global civil aviation security
Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development of Air Transport – Foster harmonized and economically viable development of international civil aviation that does not unduly harm the environment

Foundation of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
The consequence of the studies initiated by the US and subsequent consultations between the Major Allies was that the US government extended an invitation to 55 States or authorities to attend, in November 1944, an International Civil Aviation Conference in Chicago. Fifty-four States attended this Conference end of which a Convention on International Civil Aviation was signed by 52 States set up the permanent International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as a means to secure international co-operation an highest possible degree of uniformity in regulations and standards, procedures and organisation regarding civil aviation matters. At the same time the International Services Transit Agreement and the International Air Transport Agreement were signed.

The most important work accomplished by the Chicago Conference was in the technical field because the Conference laid the foundation for a set of rules and regulations regarding air navigation as a whole which brought safety in flying a great step forward and paved the way for the application of a common air navigation system throughout the world.

Because of the inevitable delays in the ratification of the Convention, the Conference had signed an Interim Agreement, which foresaw the creation of a Provisional International Organization of a technical and advisory nature with the purpose of collaboration in the field of international civil aviation (PICAO). This Organization was in operation from August 1945 to April 1947 when the permanent ICAO came into being. Its seat was in Montreal, Canada and in 1947 the change from PICAO to ICAO was little more than a formality. However, it also brought about the end of ICAN because, now that ICAO was firmly established, the ICAN member States agreed to dissolve ICAN by naming ICAO specifically as its successor Organization.

From the very assumption of activities of PICAO/ICAO, it was realised that the work of the Secretariat, especially in the technical field, would have to cover two major activities:
a. those which covered generally applicable rules and regulations concerning training and licensing of aeronautical personnel both in the air and on the ground, communication systems and procedures, rules for the air and air traffic control systems and practices, airworthiness requirements for aircraft engaged in international air navigation as well as their registration and identification, aeronautical meteorology and maps and charts. For obvious reasons, these aspects required uniformity on a world-wide scale if truly international air navigation was to become a possibility. Activities in these fields had therefore to be handled by a central agency, i.e. ICAO headquarters, if local deviations or separate developments were to be avoided;
b. those concerning the practical application of air navigation services and facilities by States and their co-ordinated implementation in specific areas where operating conditions and other relevant parameters were comparable.

To meet the latter objective it was agreed to sub-divide the surface of the earth into a number of “regions” within which distinct and specific air navigation problems of a similar nature existed. A typical example of this process is illustrated by a comparison of the so-called “North Atlantic Region (NAT)”, where the primary problems concern long-range overseas navigation, with the “European-Mediterranean region (EUR)” where the co-ordination of trans-European operations with domestic and short-range international traffic constitutes the major problem. Once the regions created, it was necessary to provide bodies which were able to assist States in the resolution of their specific “regional” problems and it was agreed that this could best be achieved by the creation of a number of Regional Offices which were to be located either in the Region they served or, if more than one Region was to be served by such an Office, as close as possible to the Region concerned.

As a consequence of the above ICAO adopted the concept of Regions and Regional Offices on the understanding that any regional activities could only be undertaken provided they did not conflict with the world-wide activities of the Organization. However, it was also recognised that such activities could vary from Region to Region taking into account the general economic, technical or social environment of the Region concerned.

Jurisdiction of Court

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

As stated in Article 93 of the UN Charter, all 193 UN members are automatically parties to the Court’s statute.[11] Non-UN members may also become parties to the Court’s statute under the Article 93(2) procedure. For example, before becoming a UN member state, Switzerland used this procedure in 1948 to become a party. And Nauru became a party in 1988. Once a state is a party to the Court’s statute, it is entitled to participate in cases before the Court. However, being a party to the statute does not automatically give the Court jurisdiction over disputes involving those parties. The issue of jurisdiction is considered in the two types of ICJ cases: contentious issues and advisory opinions.

Contentious issues

In contentious cases (adversarial proceedings seeking to settle a dispute), the ICJ produces a binding ruling between states that agree to submit to the ruling of the court. Only states may be parties in contentious cases. Individuals, corporations, parts of a federal state, NGOs, UN organs and self-determination groups are excluded from direct participation in cases, although the Court may receive information from public international organizations. This does not preclude non-state interests from being the subject of proceedings if one state brings the case against another. For example, a state may, in case of “diplomatic protection”, bring a case on behalf of one of its nationals or corporations.[12]

Jurisdiction is often a crucial question for the Court in contentious cases. (See Procedure below.) The key principle is that the ICJ has jurisdiction only on the basis of consent. Article 36 outlines four bases on which the Court’s jurisdiction may be founded.

First, 36(1) provides that parties may refer cases to the Court (jurisdiction founded on “special agreement” or “compromis”). This method is based on explicit consent rather than true compulsory jurisdiction. It is, perhaps, the most effective basis for the Court’s jurisdiction because the parties concerned have a desire for the dispute to be resolved by the Court and are thus more likely to comply with the Court’s judgment.
Second, 36(1) also gives the Court jurisdiction over “matters specifically provided for … in treaties and conventions in force”. Most modern treatieswill contain a compromissory clause, providing for dispute resolution by the ICJ.[13] Cases founded on compromissory clauses have not been as effective as cases founded on special agreement, since a state may have no interest in having the matter examined by the Court and may refuse to comply with a judgment. For example, during the Iran hostage crisis, Iran refused to participate in a case brought by the US based on a compromissory clause contained in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, nor did it comply with the judgment.[14] Since the 1970s, the use of such clauses has declined. Many modern treaties set out their own dispute resolution regime, often based on forms of arbitration.[15]
Third, Article 36(2) allows states to make optional clause declarations accepting the Court’s jurisdiction. The label “compulsory” which is sometimes placed on Article 36(2) jurisdiction is misleading since declarations by states are voluntary. Furthermore, many declarations contain reservations, such as exclusion from jurisdiction certain types of disputes (“ratione materia”).[16]The principle of reciprocity may further limit jurisdiction. As of February 2011, sixty-six states had a declaration in force.[17] Of the permanent Security Council members, only the United Kingdom has a declaration. In the Court’s early years, most declarations were made by industrialized countries. Since the Nicaragua Case, declarations made by developing countries have increased, reflecting a growing confidence in the Court since the 1980s. Industrialized countries however have sometimes increased exclusions or removed their declarations in recent years. Examples include the USA, as mentioned previously and Australia who modified their declaration in 2002 to exclude disputes on maritime boundaries (most likely to prevent an impending challenge from East Timor who gained their independence two months later).[18]
Finally, 36(5) provides for jurisdiction on the basis of declarations made under the Permanent Court of International Justice’s statute. Article 37 of the Statute similarly transfers jurisdiction under any compromissory clause in a treaty that gave jurisdiction to the PCIJ.
In addition, the Court may have jurisdiction on the basis of tacit consent (forum prorogatum). In the absence of clear jurisdiction under Article 36, jurisdiction will be established if the respondent accepts ICJ jurisdiction explicitly or simply pleads on the merits. The notion arose in the Corfu Channel Case (UK v Albania) (1949) in which the Court held that a letter from Albania stating that it submitted to the jurisdiction of the ICJ was sufficient to grant the court jurisdiction.

Advisory opinion

An advisory opinion is a function of the Court open only to specified United Nations bodies and agencies. On receiving a request, the Court decides which States and organizations might provide useful information and gives them an opportunity to present written or oral statements. Advisory Opinions were intended as a means by which UN agencies could seek the Court’s help in deciding complex legal issues that might fall under their respective mandates.

In principle, the Court’s advisory opinions are only consultative in character, but they are influential and widely respected. Whilst certain instruments or regulations can provide in advance that the advisory opinion shall be specifically binding on particular agencies or states, they are inherently non-binding under the Statute of the Court. This non-binding character does not mean that advisory opinions are without legal effect, because the legal reasoning embodied in them reflects the Court’s authoritative views on important issues of international law and, in arriving at them, the Court follows essentially the same rules and procedures that govern its binding judgments delivered in contentious cases submitted to it by sovereign states.

An advisory opinion derives its status and authority from the fact that it is the official pronouncement of the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.[19]

Advisory Opinions have often been controversial because the questions asked are controversial or the case was pursued as an indirect way of bringing what is really a contentious case before the Court. Examples of advisory opinions can be found in the section advisory opinions in the List of International Court of Justice cases article. One such well-known advisory opinion is the Nuclear Weapons Case.

How ICAO works?

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The constitution of ICAO is the Convention on International Civil Aviation, drawn up by a conference in Chicago in November and December 1944, and to which each ICAO Contracting State is a party. According to the terms of the Convention, the Organization is made up of an Assembly, a Council of limited membership with various subordinate bodies and a Secretariat. The chief officers are the President of the Council and the Secretary General.

The Assembly, composed of representatives from all Contracting States, is the sovereign body of ICAO. It meets every three years, reviewing in detail the work of the Organization and setting policy for the coming years. It also votes a triennial budget.

The Council, the governing body which is elected by the Assembly for a three-year term, is composed of 36 States. The Assembly chooses the Council Member States under three headings: States of chief importance in air transport, States which make the largest contribution to the provision of facilities for air navigation, and States whose designation will ensure that all major areas of the world are represented. As the governing body, the Council gives continuing direction to the work of ICAO. It is in the Council that Standards and Recommended Practices are adopted and incorporated as Annexes to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. The Council is assisted by the Air Navigation Commission (technical matters), the Air Transport Committee (economic matters), the Committee on Joint Support of Air Navigation Services and the Finance Committee.

The Secretariat, headed by a Secretary General, is divided into five main divisions: the Air Navigation Bureau, the Air Transport Bureau, the Technical Co-operation Bureau, the Legal Bureau, and the Bureau of Administration and Services. In order that the work of the Secretariat shall reflect a truly international approach, professional personnel are recruited on a broad geographical basis.

ICAO works in close co-operation with other members of the United Nations family such as the World Meteorological Organization, the International Telecommunication Union, the Universal Postal Union, the World Health Organization and the International Maritime Organization. Non-governmental organizations which also participate in ICAO’s work include the International Air Transport Association, the Airports Council International, the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations, and the International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations.

Support of military dictatorships

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The role of the Bretton Woods institutions has been controversial since the late Cold War period, due to claims that the IMF policy makers supported anti-communist military dictatorships friendly to American and European corporations. Critics also claim that the IMF is generally apathetic or hostile to their views of human rights, and labor rights. The controversy has helped spark the Anti-globalization movement. Arguments in favor of the IMF say that economic stability is a precursor to democracy; however, critics highlight various examples in which democratized countries fell after receiving IMF loans.

In the 1960s, the IMF and the World Bank supported the government of Brazil’s military dictator Castello Branco with tens of millions of dollars of loans and credit that were denied to previous democratically elected governments.

Countries that were or are under a military dictatorship whilst being members of the IMF/World Bank (support from various sources in $Billion):

Support of military dictatorships

Support of military dictatorships
Country indebted to IMF/World Bank	Dictator	In power	*Debt %^[^{clarification needed}*^] at start of dictatorship**	Debt % at end of dictatorship	Country debts in 1996	Dictator debts generated $ billion	Dictator generated debt % of total debt
Argentina	Military dictatorship	1976 - 1983	9.3	48.9	93.8	39.6	42%
Bolivia	Military dictatorship	1962 - 1980	0	2.7	5.2	2.7	52%
Brazil	Military dictatorship	1964 - 1985	5.1	105.1	179	100	56%
Chile	Augusto Pinochet	1973 - 1989	5.2	18	27.4	12.8	47%
El Salvador	Military dictatorship	1979 - 1994	0.9	2.2	2.2	1.3	59%
Ethiopia	Mengistu Haile Mariam	1977 - 1991	0.5	4.2	10	3.7	37%
Haiti	Jean-Claude Duvalier	1971 - 1986	0	0.7	0.9	0.7	78%
Indonesia	Suharto	1967 - 1998	3	129	129	126	98%
Kenya	Moi	1979 - 2002	2.7	6.9	6.9	4.2	61%
Liberia	Doe	1979 - 1990	0.6	1.9	2.1	1.3	62%
Malawi	Banda	1964 - 1994	0.1	2	2.3	1.9	83%
Nigeria	Buhari/Babangida/Abacha	1984 - 1998	17.8	31.4	31.4	13.6	43%
Pakistan	Zia-ul Haq	1977 - 1988	7.6	17
Pakistan	Pervez Musharraf	1999 - 2008
Paraguay	Stroessner	1954 - 1989	0.1	2.4	2.1	2.3	96%
Philippines	Marcos	1965 - 1986	1.5	28.3	41.2	26.8	65%
Somalia	Siad Barre	1969 - 1991	0	2.4	2.6	2.4	92%
Sudan	Nimeiry/al-Mahdi	1969 - present	0.3	17	17	16.7	98%
Thailand	Military dictatorship	1950 - 1983	0	13.9	90.8	13.9	15%
Zaire/Democratic Republic of the Congo	Mobutu	1965 - 1997	0.3	12.8	12.8	12.5	98%

Notes: Debt at takeover by dictatorship; earliest data published by the World Bank is for 1970. Debt at end of dictatorship (or 1996, most recent date for World Bank data).

Effectiveness

Two criticisms from economists have been that financial aid is always bound to so-called “Conditionalities”, including Structural Adjustment Programs (SAP). It is claimed that conditionalities (economic performance targets established as a precondition for IMF loans) retard social stability and hence inhibit the stated goals of the IMF, while Structural Adjustment Programs lead to an increase in poverty in recipient countries.

The IMF sometimes advocates “austerity programmes,” increasing taxes even when the economy is weak, in order to generate government revenue and bring budgets closer to a balance, thus reducing budget deficits. Countries are often advised to lower their corporate tax rate. These policies were criticized by Joseph E. Stiglitz, former chief economist and Senior Vice President at the World Bank, in his book Globalization and Its Discontents. He argued that by converting to a more Monetarist approach, the fund no longer had a valid purpose, as it was designed to provide funds for countries to carry out Keynesian reflations, and that the IMF “was not participating in a conspiracy, but it was reflecting the interests and ideology of the Western financial community”.

Argentina, which had been considered by the IMF to be a model country in its compliance to policy proposals by the Bretton Woods institutions, experienced a catastrophic economic crisis in 2001, which some believe to have been caused by IMF-induced budget restrictions — which undercut the government’s ability to sustain national infrastructure even in crucial areas such as health, education, and security — and privatization of strategically vital national Others attribute the crisis to Argentina’s misdesigned fiscal federalism, which caused subnational spending to increase rapidly. The crisis added to widespread hatred of this institution in Argentina and other South American countries, with many blaming the IMF for the region’s economic problems. The current — as of early 2006 — trend towards moderate left-wing governments in the region and a growing concern with the development of a regional economic policy largely independent of big business pressures has been ascribed to this crisis.

Another example of where IMF Structural Adjustment Programmes aggravated the problem was in Kenya. Before the IMF got involved in the country, the Kenyan central bank oversaw all currency movements in and out of the country. The IMF mandated that the Kenyan central bank had to allow easier currency movement. However, the adjustment resulted in very little foreign investment, but allowed Kamlesh Manusuklal Damji Pattni, with the help of corrupt government officials, to siphon off billions of Kenyan shillings in what came to be known as the Goldenberg scandal, leaving the country worse off than it was before the IMF reforms were implemented.[citation needed] In an interview, the former Romanian Prime Minister Tăriceanu stated that “Since 2005, IMF is constantly making mistakes when it appreciates the country’s economic performances”.

Overall, the IMF success record is perceived as limited.[citation needed] While it was created to help stabilize the global economy, since 1980 critics claim over 100 countries (or reputedly most of the Fund’s membership) have experienced a banking collapse that they claim have reduced GDP by four percent or more, far more than at any time in Post-Depression history.[citation needed] The considerable delay in the IMF’s response to any crisis, and the fact that it tends to only respond to them (or even create them) rather than prevent them, has led many economists to argue for reform. In 2006, an IMF reform agenda called the Medium Term Strategy was widely endorsed by the institution’s member countries. The agenda includes changes in IMF governance to enhance the role of developing countries in the institution’s decision-making process and steps to deepen the effectiveness of its core mandate, which is known as economic surveillance or helping member countries adopt macroeconomic policies that will sustain global growth and reduce poverty. On June 15, 2007, the Executive Board of the IMF adopted the 2007 Decision on Bilateral Surveillance, a landmark measure that replaced a 30-year-old decision of the Fund’s member countries on how the IMF should analyze economic outcomes at the country level.

Impact on access to food

A number of civil society organizations have criticized the IMF’s policies for their impact on people’s access to food, particularly in developing countries. In October 2008, former US President Bill Clinton joined this chorus in a speech to the United Nations World Food Day, which criticized the World Bank and IMF for their policies on food and agriculture:

We need the World Bank, the IMF, all the big foundations, and all the governments to admit that, for 30 years, we all blew it, including me when I was President. We were wrong to believe that food was like some other product in international trade, and we all have to go back to a more responsible and sustainable form of agriculture.

— Former US President Bill Clinton, Speech at United Nations World Food Day, October 16, 2008.

Impact on public health

In 2008, a study by analysts from Cambridge and Yale universities published on the open-access Public Library of Science concluded that strict conditions on the international loans by the IMF resulted in thousands of deaths in Eastern Europe by tuberculosis as public health care had to be weakened. In the 21 countries to which the IMF had given loans, tuberculosis deaths rose by 16.6%.
In 2009, a book by Rick Rowden titled, The Deadly Ideas of Neoliberalism: How the IMF has Undermined Public Health and the Fight Against Aids, claimed that the IMF’s monetarist approach towards prioritizing price stability (low inflation) and fiscal restraint (low budget deficits) was unnecessarily restrictive and has prevented developing countries from being able to scale up long-term public investment as a percent of GDP in the underlying public health infrastructure. The book claimed the consequences have been chronically underfunded public health systems, leading to dilapidated health infrastructure, inadequate numbers of health personnel, and demoralizing working conditions that have fueled the “push factors” driving the brain drain of nurses migrating from poor countries to rich ones, all of which has undermined public health systems and the fight against HIV/AIDS in developing countries.

Impact on environment

IMF policies have been repeatedly criticized for making it difficult for indebted countries to avoid ecosystem-damaging projects that generate cash flow, in particular oil, coal and forest-destroying lumber and agriculture projects. Ecuador for example had to defy IMF advice repeatedly in order to pursue the protection of its rain forests, though paradoxically this need was cited in IMF argument to support that country. The IMF acknowledged this paradox in a March 2010 staff position report which proposed the IMF Green Fund, a mechanism to issue Special Drawing Rights directly to pay for climate harm prevention and potentially other ecological protection as pursued generally by other environmental finance.

While the response to these moves was generally positive possibly because ecological protection and energy and infrastructure transformation are more politically neutral than pressures to change social policy. Some experts voiced concern that the IMF was not representative, and that the IMF proposals to generate only 200 billion dollars/year by 2020 with the SDRs as seed funds, did not go far enough to undo the general incentive to pursue destructive projects inherent in the world commodity trading and banking systems – criticisms often levelled at the WTO and large global banking institutions.

In the context of the May 2010 European banking crisis, some observers also noted that Spain and California, two troubled economies within Europe and the US respectively, and also Germany, the primary and politically most fragile supporter of a Euro currency bailout would benefit from IMF recognition of their leadership in green technology, and directly from Green-Fund generated demand for their exports, which might also improve their credit standing with international bankers.

Criticism from free-market advocates

Typically the IMF and its supporters advocate a monetarist approach. As such, adherents of supply-side economics generally find themselves in open disagreement with the IMF. The IMF frequently advocates currency devaluation, criticized by proponents of supply-side economics as inflationary. Secondly they link higher taxes under “austerity programmes” with economic contraction.

Currency devaluation is recommended by the IMF to the governments of poor nations with struggling economies. Some economists claim these IMF policies are destructive to economic prosperity.
Complaints have also been directed toward the International Monetary Fund gold reserve being undervalued. At its inception in 1945, the IMF pegged gold at US$35 per Troy ounce of gold. In 1973, the administration of US President Richard Nixon lifted the fixed asset value of gold in favor of a world market price. This need to lift the fixed asset value of gold had largely come about because Petrodollars outside the United States were worth more than could be backed by the gold at Fort Knox under the fixed exchange rate system. Following this, the fixed exchange rates of currencies tied to gold were switched to a floating rate, also based on market price and exchange. The fixed rate system had only served to limit the nominal amount of assistance the organization could provide to debt-ridden countries.

Managing director

Historically the IMF’s managing director has been European and the president of the World Bank has been from the United States. However, this standard is increasingly being questioned and competition for these two posts may soon open up to include other qualified candidates from any part of the world. Executive Directors, who confirm the managing director, are voted in by Finance Ministers from countries they represent. The First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, the second-in-command, has traditionally been (and is today) an American.

The IMF is for the most part controlled by the major Western Powers, with voting rights on the Executive board based on a quota derived from the relative size of a country in the global economy. Critics claim that the board rarely votes and passes issues contradicting the will of the US or Europeans, which combined represent the largest bloc of shareholders in the Fund. On the other hand, Executive Directors that represent emerging and developing countries have many times strongly defended the group of nations in their constituency. Alexandre Kafka, who represented several Latin American countries for 32 years as Executive Director (including 21 as the dean of the Board, is a prime example.

Rodrigo Rato became the ninth Managing Director of the IMF on June 7, 2004 and resigned his post at the end of October 2007.
EU ministers agreed on the candidacy of Dominique Strauss-Kahn as managing director of the IMF at the Economic and Financial Affairs Council meeting in Brussels on July 10, 2007. On September 28, 2007, the International Monetary Fund’s 24 executive directors elected Mr. Strauss-Kahn as new managing director, with broad support including from the United States and the 27-nation European Union. Strauss-Kahn succeeded Spain’s Rodrigo de Rato, who retired on October 31, 2007.The only other nominee was Josef Tošovský, a late candidate proposed by Russia. Strauss-Kahn said: “I am determined to pursue without delay the reforms needed for the IMF to make financial stability serve the international community, while fostering growth and employment.”

Dates	Name	Nationality
May 6, 1946 – May 5, 1951	Camille Gutt	Belgium
August 3, 1951 – October 3, 1956	Ivar Rooth	Sweden
November 21, 1956 – May 5, 1963	Per Jacobsson	Sweden
September 1, 1963 – August 31, 1973	Pierre-Paul Schweitzer	France
September 1, 1973 – June 16, 1978	Johannes Witteveen	Netherlands
June 17, 1978 – January 15, 1987	Jacques de Larosière	France
January 16, 1987 – February 14, 2000	Michel Camdessus	France
May 1, 2000 – March 4, 2004	Horst Köhler	Germany
June 7, 2004 – October 31, 2007	Rodrigo Rato	Spain
November 1, 2007 – present	Dominique Strauss-Kahn	France

In the media

Life and Debt, a documentary film, deals with the IMF’s policies’ influence on Jamaica and its economy from a critical point of view.

The Debt of Dictators explores the lending of billions of dollars by the IMF, World Bank multinational banks and other international financial institutions to brutal dictators throughout the world. (see IMF/World Bank support of military dictatorships)

Criticism of UN

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

There are no Muslim countries in the Security Council.
Africa and Latin America do not have representatives in the Security Council.
Economically powerful states like Japan and Germany are not in the Security Council.
Important states like Brazil, Nigeria, and India want to have a place in the Security Council.
Security Council is composed of the victorious states of the Second World War.

Composition of the International Court of Justice

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The ICJ is composed of fifteen judges elected to nine year terms by the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The election process is set out in Articles 4–19 of the ICJ statute. Elections are staggered with five judges elected every three years, in order to ensure continuity within the court.

Should a judge die in office, the practice has generally been to elect a judge of the same nationality to complete the term. No two may be nationals of the same country. According to Article 9, the membership of the Court is supposed to represent the “main forms of civilization and of the principal legal systems of the world”. Essentially, this has meant common law, civil law and socialist law (now post-communist law). Since its creation, four of the five permanent members of the Security Council (France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) have always had a judge on the Court. The exception was China (the Republic of China until 1971, the People’s Republic of China from 1971 onwards), which did not have a judge on the Court from 1967–1985, because it did not put forward a candidate. The rule on a geopolitical composition of the bench exists despite the fact that there is no provision for it in the Statute of the ICJ.

Article 6 of the Statute provides that all judges should be “elected regardless of their nationality among persons of high moral character”, who are either qualified for the highest judicial office in their home states or known as lawyers with sufficient competence in international law. Judicial independence is dealt with specifically in Articles 16–18. Judges of the ICJ are not able to hold any other post, nor act as counsel. In practice the Members of the Court have their own interpretation of these rules. This allows them to be involved in outside arbitration and hold professional posts as long as there is no conflict of interest. A judge can be dismissed only by a unanimous vote of other members of the Court.[4] Despite these provisions, the independence of ICJ judges has been questioned. For example, during the Nicaragua Case, the USA issued a communiqué suggesting that it could not present sensitive material to the Court because of the presence of judges from Eastern bloc states.[5]

Judges may deliver joint judgments or give their own separate opinions. Decisions and Advisory Opinions are by majority and, in the event of an equal division, the President’s vote becomes decisive.[6] Judges may also deliver separate dissenting opinions.

Ad hoc judges

Article 31 of the statute sets out a procedure whereby ad hoc judges sit on contentious cases before the Court. This system allows any party to a contentious case to nominate a judge of their choosing. It is possible that as many as seventeen judges may sit on one case.

This system may seem strange when compared with domestic court processes, but its purpose is to encourage states to submit cases to the Court. For example, if a state knows it will have a judicial officer who can participate in deliberation and offer other judges local knowledge and an understanding of the state’s perspective, that state may be more willing to submit to the Court’s jurisdiction. Although this system does not sit well with the judicial nature of the body, it is usually of little practical consequence. Ad hoc judges usually (but not always) vote in favor of the state that appointed them and thus cancel each other out. [7]

Chambers

Generally, the Court sits as full bench, but in the last fifteen years it has on occasion sat as a chamber. Articles 26–29 of the statute allow the Court to form smaller chambers, usually 3 or 5 judges, to hear cases. Two types of chambers are contemplated by Article 26: firstly, chambers for special categories of cases, and second, the formation of ad hoc chambers to hear particular disputes. In 1993 a special chamber was established, under Article 26(1) of the ICJ statute, to deal specifically with environmental matters (although this chamber has never been used).

Ad hoc chambers are more frequently convened. For example, chambers were used to hear the Gulf of Maine Case (Canada/USA).[8] In that case, the parties made clear they would withdraw the case unless the Court appointed judges to the chamber who were acceptable to the parties. Judgments of chambers may have less authority than full Court judgments, or may diminish the proper interpretation of universal international law informed by a variety of cultural and legal perspectives. On the other hand, the use of chambers might encourage greater recourse to the Court and thus enhance international dispute resolution.[9]

Current composition

As of 27 April 2012, the composition of the Court is as follows:[10]

UNESCO and Nepal

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Mission Statement

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu contributes to building peace, alleviating poverty, and fostering sustainable development and intercultural dialogue in Nepal through education, science, culture, communication and information.

UNESCO works to attain a quality Education for All, focusing on gender equality and adult literacy, to mobilize scientific knowledge and science policy for sustainable development, to preserve cultural heritage, promote cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue, and to empower people through the free flow of ideas and access to information and knowledge.

To achieve these objectives, UNESCO actively participates in the work of the UN Country Team in Nepal and closely cooperates with other development partners in the country.

Education
Since its establishment in 1998, the UNESCO Office in Kathmandu has been working with the government, development partners and civil society organizations to support national efforts to achieve the goals of Education for All (EFA) focusing on literacy and teacher training, strengthening the education system, and planning and managing education.

Literacy
Literacy is a fundamental human right. Within the framework of the United Nations Literacy Decade (UNLD 2003-2012) and the Literacy Initiative for Empowerment (LIFE), the UNESCO Office in Kathmandu provides policy support, for example in the preparation and implementation of Nepal’s “10-Year Literacy Policy and Programme Framework 2006”.

The Office is working to build capacity of education officials with a view to improving literacy for sustainable development for example through:

Designing and implementing mother tongue-based literacy programs
Supporting community learning centers as venues for community development and for delivery of non-formal education services through training of CLC managers and facilitators.

Teacher Education
Well-trained teachers are critical to providing a quality education for all. Neither Education for All (EFA), nor the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) will be reached without adequate recognition of the role played by teachers.

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports national efforts in:

Building capacity and designing and developing training materials
Supporting research to strengthen the teacher education system through pre-service teacher training and promoting multilingual education
Reorienting teacher education from the perspective of EFA and ESD and integrating elements of education for sustainable development in teacher education and curriculum.

Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE)
Early Childhood Care and Education( ECCE) uses a holistic approach integrating health and nutrition to reach Goal 1 of the EFA Dakar Framework for Action: “ Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children.”

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports national efforts in developing an ECCE strategy framework and curriculum and enhancing the capacity of education officials and other key stakeholders at all levels. For example, the office assists government in:

Reviewing ECCE policy
Preparing policy briefs
Developing training materials

Primary Education
Primary (basic) education is a fundamental human right. UNESCO works with national governments and EFA partners to ensure free and compulsory primary/basic education of a good quality for all by 2015.

In the area of primary education, the UNESCO Office in Kathmandu works, for example, in:

Developing bridging prospects between formal and non-formal education through equivalency programmes to achieve universal primary education
Developing and testing equivalency programmes for out-of-school children in primary education through alternative schooling, with a particular focus on disadvantaged groups.

Secondary Education
Secondary education aims to help young people to develop their full human potential and ensure their place in society as productive, responsible and democratic citizens. It helps to prepare learners in both formal and non-formal settings for higher education and the world of work.

In Nepal, progress towards achieving Universal Primary Education has led to a growing demand for secondary education. The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports the government with the effective implementation of the School Sector Reform Plan (2009-2015), providing support in capacity development towards improving access and retention of students in secondary education.

Higher Education
There is a growing recognition of the role that higher education plays in enabling Nepal to overcome poverty and achieve sustainable development and economic growth. The government‘s focus is on the overall quality enhancement of higher education and scientific research and development.

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports national efforts in developing a comprehensive higher education policy in Nepal.

Inclusive Education
Inclusive education is addressing the diverse needs of all learners by reducing barriers to, and within the learning environment. It addresses the learning needs of all children, youth, and adults, with a specific focus on those who are vulnerable to marginalization and exclusion.

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports national efforts to enhance the capacities of teachers and programme implementers, for example through:

Adapting the Inclusive Education Toolkit to promote the school environment that celebrates diversity and upholds human rights
Preparing an audio-visual documentary “Hamro (Our) School” on the practices of inclusive education in Nepalese classroom was prepared and disseminated
Preparing an advocacy kit for promoting multilingual education: Including the excluded is adapted in Nepali, Maithili and Bhojpuri

HIV and AIDS in Education
The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports responses to HIV and AIDS that are inclusive and sensitive to the needs and issues of all of the population, but with particular attention to children in the school setting.

Examples of the Office’s action in the area of HIV and AIDS in Education include:

Preparing HIV and AIDS advocacy kits for community members and head teachers
Reviewing the education sector response to HIV and AIDS
Supporting the MoE in developing an education sector strategy and policy on HIV and AIDS
Reducing the vulnerability of illiterate women to HIV and AIDS through non-formal means of education

Languages in Education
The Office in Kathmandu promotes mother tongue instruction as a means of improving educational quality by building upon the knowledge and experience of learners and teachers.

The Kathmandu Office’s work includes:

Designing and implementing mother tongue-based literacy programmes
Developing and disseminating an advocacy kit for promoting multilingual education: including the excluded
Preparing thematic papers on language issues in a federal structure and organizing informed debates

EFA Monitoring
The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports Nepal’s efforts to build capacity for evidence-based planning and monitoring in the area of education and to provide technical assistance in data collection and analysis with respect to both formal and non-formal education.

Examples of the action of the Office in this regard include:

Supporting in the preparation of Flash reports (Department of Education) of school level educational statistics based on annual school censuses;
Strengthening school records management;
Establishing a non-formal education management information system (NFE-MIS);
Testing new methods of collecting literacy data for example using literacy modules in household surveys.

Education and Federalism
In view of providing support for the smooth transition of Nepal from a centralized education to a decentralized system, the UNESCO Office in Kathmandu initiated debates on education and federalism, engaging members of the education community. The Office helped organize debates with the following key themes:

Free and compulsory education;
Private schooling;
Language issue;
Teacher management;
Students’ pathways;
Financing of education;
Governance of higher education;
Financing of higher education;
Higher education curriculum and;
Open and distance education.

ICTs in Education
Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) contribute to universal access to education, equity in education, the delivery of quality learning and teaching, teachers’ professional development and more efficient education management, governance and administration.

An example of the work of the UNESCO Office in Kathmandu is providing support to capacity development and the preparation of an ICT in Education Master Plan.

Gender Mainstreaming in Education
In UNESCO’s Medium-Term Strategy 2008-2013, gender equality has been designated as one of the Organization’s two global priorities. This priority is supported by a dual approach which consists of gender mainstreaming and gender-specific programming.
Gender mainstreaming is a strategy that makes the experiences and concerns of women and men an integral dimension of policy formulation and programming. It demands project design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation that do not perpetuate gender inequality. The ultimate goal is to achieve gender equality.

In support to building an effective national education system, the Office in collaboration with the MOE and UNICEF, provided the following support:

Training for Gender Focal Points to enhance their knowledge and understanding with respect to mainstreaming gender in education.
A study on situation analysis of gender responsive budgeting in the education sector in Nepal. The findings of the study will inform policy on achieving gender equality in education and its recommendations will help improve planning.
Translation and dissemination of the Gender in Education Network in the Asia-Pacific (GENIA) toolkit for wider audiences.

Education for Sustainable Development
Education for sustainable development (ESD) seeks to integrate the principles, values and practices of sustainable development into all aspects of education and learning.
The action of the UNESCO Office in Kathmandu to foster ESD includes, for example:

Promoting education for sustainable development;
Developing the capacity of education officials and other key stakeholders for improving their knowledge and understanding to integrate elements of ESD in teacher education and curriculum.

Research
The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports the national efforts to achieve the goals of EFA through undertaking research on different themes. As a continuous activity, the Office has undertaken/is undertaking reviews and studies, including the following themes:

Situational Analysis of Gender Responsive Budgeting in the Education Sector in Nepal;
Strengthening Teacher Training to Achieve EFA: Reviewing Pre-service Teacher Training in Nepal;
Strengthening Community Learning Centres (CLCs) to Achieve EFA: Assessing the Functioning of CLCs in Nepal;
Regional Review of Financing Literacy Programmes: Achieving the Goal of Literacy for All in Nepal;
Transition from Primary to Secondary Education: Review of Policy Experiences in Nepal;
Follow-up of Review of the Pre-service Teacher Education System in Nepal;
Promoting Multilingual Education (MLE) in Nepal.

Natural Sciences
In the area of natural sciences, UNESCO’s strategy consists in contributing to mobilizing science knowledge and policy for sustainable development focusing on a limited number of strategic interventions due to the fact that the Office has no dedicated human and financial resources in the area. Activities are mainly channeled through UNESCO Office in New Delhi.

Activities in this area focus on:

The preparation of science projects that can help in disaster risk reduction, e.g. forecasting earthquakes and flood hazards
Cooperate Nepal Academy of Science and Technology in preparation of national policy in science and technology in Nepal and help identification of a number of priority areas for research and development
Advocacy for clean water through variety of events that link water and development

Culture
UNESCO is the only international agency in Nepal actively involved in the area of culture. The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu has been conducting a wide variety of programmes and activities aimed at supporting the government to foster the country’s cultural diversity; protect its natural and cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible; promote cultural diversity and inter cultural dialogue for social cohesion; and contribute to a culture of peace.

Nepal is home to four World Heritage Sites:

Kathmandu Valley (1979) including the Durbar Squares of Hanuman Dhoka (Kathmandu), Patan and Bhaktapur, the Buddhist stupas of Swayambhu and Bauddhanath and the Hindu temples of Pashupati and Changu Narayan
Sagarmatha National Park (1979)
Chitwan National Park (1984)
Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha (1997)

Communication and Information
Communication, information and knowledge are driving forces of sustainable development. Access to information and a free, independent and professional media are particularly crucial in Nepal, where the Constitution and state restructuring are under way and democracy is still young.

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu supports peace building efforts by building the capacity of journalists, supporting community multimedia centres and community radios, promoting press freedom and the right to Information, and fostering access to information and knowledge. The Office works closely with national partners, creating strong national ownership of UNESCO’s action themes in these fields.

Access to Knowledge
UNESCO works to create an enabling environment, which is conducive to, and facilitates universal access to information and knowledge.
Nepal is going through an important period of democracy building and state-restructuring. Therefore it is particularly important to have a well-informed population with access to accurate and independent information from diverse sources, with an understanding of the decision-making processes.

Although the quality and diversity of media is increasing in more populated areas, the situation is different in remote areas. Community Multimedia Centres (CMCs) are important actors in supporting democracy and reducing poverty, particularly in isolated rural areas. Other important actors to facilitate access to information and knowledge are libraries and archives and, increasingly, online resources.

Examples of the Office’s intervention in this area include:

Building the capacity of CMCs through training and networking activities
Advocating for the right to information
Building capacities to manage information that is electronically available
Promoting the safeguarding of the documentary heritage, for example through the celebration of World Day for Audio-Visual Heritage, held annually on 28 October

Freedom of Expression
UNESCO promotes freedom of expression and freedom of the press as a basic human right through sensitization and monitoring activities. The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu acts as a promoter of dialogue among media professionals in post-conflict Nepal and provides advice to media professionals, institutions and local authorities in Nepal to enhance the development of freedom of expression. It promotes media independence and pluralism in the country as fundamental to the process of democracy, peace and the restructuring of the Constitution.

The Office’s work in this area includes:

Undertaking advocacy in the form of open dialogue with government and civil society and through issuance of press statements on various pressing issues, such as freedom of expression, freedom of the press and impunity of violence against journalists
Promoting freedom of expression and freedom of the press through the celebrations of the World Press Freedom Day, held annually on 3 May
Promoting the principle of public service broadcasting through actions aimed at guaranteeing the principle of editorial independence by law and execution of it through regulation in the new Constitution of Nepal

Media Development
UNESCO helps to strengthen the capacity of communication institutions and media professionals. In Nepal, the media has an important role in contributing to an effective state by strengthening democracy, human rights, good governance and citizen engagement. Only with well trained journalists who understand their rights and responsibilities can the Nepali media take its crucial place in strengthening democracy and disseminating information to the Nepali people.

The UNESCO Office in Kathmandu works to promote international professional standards of journalism and public service and to promote dialogue among media professionals. Action in this area includes:

Undertaking an assessment of Nepal’s media landscape in 2011, based on the Media Development Indicators
Assessing the performance of community radios
Assisting in the establishment of a public service broadcasting system in Nepal
Translating UNESCO standard setting tools into the Nepali language (e.g., “Model Curricula for journalism training” and “Media Development Indicators”)

The war-time origins of the UN

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The concept of the United Nations developed by stages after the United States entered the war following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Already, however, in the previous August, a meeting had taken place between President Franklin Roosevelt and the British prime minister Winston Churchill on board a warship off the Canadian coast. Here the idea of a collective security system for the future post-war world was resurrected. The ‘Atlantic Charter’ which came out of this insisted that ‘all nations of the world, for realistic as well as spiritual reasons must come to the abandonment of the use of force’. To this end it spoke of ‘the establishment of a . . . permanent system of general security’ [Doc. 3, p. 118]. By the beginning of 1942 the twenty-six anti-Axis powers had committed themselves to this declaration and themselves had begun to describe their military alliance as the ‘United Nations’. During the remaining years of the war, ideas for the new peacetime organization developed. They did so, of course, under difficult circumstances. The overriding priority for the allied states was the pursuit of victory. This was the obvious prerequisite for the implementation of any post-war blueprint. Too much speculation on the nature of the new international system would have been a misuse of political energies. Additionally, Roosevelt, who like his First World War predecessor Woodrow Wilson a quarter of a century earlier was at the forefront of thinking about the new institution, was anxious to avoid a repeat of the isolationist backlash at home which had kept America out of the League by focusing too much on its proposed successor. Nevertheless, ideas began to emerge. Roosevelt’s initial thoughts centered on the management of security by the big allied powers after the end of the war: the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union and, perhaps, China (Boyd, 1971). This would be made possible by the generalized disarmament of the other states in the international system which would entrust their national security to the collective. Churchill had a more skeptical European perspective on the feasibility of this plan. He was less confident that the necessary cooperation could be achieved and maintained among the big powers. From a more traditionalist perspective he was convinced that states would continue to define their national interests in the same narrow way that had undermined the League’s attempts to implement the earlier plan for collective security. Certainly, the participation of the United States in the new arrangements would be a positive advance, but it would be unlikely to alter the basic approach to national foreign and defense policies ingrained in the attitudes of national leaders across the world. More positively, Churchill was also anxious to avoid the marginalization of the smaller and middle-sized powers which was implicit in Roosevelt’s proposals. The prime minister’s evolving view was that a strong European dimension should be central to post-war Britain’s external relations. As the two world wars had both begun in the center of Europe, it was not perhaps blindly Eurocentric to seek global solutions in a new system of relationships there. He therefore favored a new organization with a predominantly regional rather than global structure. The new body should, ideally, be one in which loose worldwide arrangements acted as an umbrella for strong local inter-governmental institutions (Luard, 1982).

At the Tehran Conference in November 1943, when the tide of the war was clearly turning in the allies’ favor, the Soviet Union was brought fully into the debate. Joseph Stalin was now presented with the American idea of the ‘four policemen’ (the major allied powers) acting as a global coalition able to deploy military enforcement powers at the head of a world assembly. The Soviet leader, like Churchill, was wary of the concentration of power in so few hands and initially shared the British preference for a strong regional dimension to any new security regime. However, Roosevelt warned Stalin that American public opinion, still touched by isolationist attitudes, might resist US involvement in security commitments determined by local states in other parts of the world. If post-war security was to be regionalized, there was no obvious reason why the United States should concern itself with anything other than the western hemisphere. While such a system might enhance Soviet power in eastern Europe, it would tend to limit it at the global level. In view of this, Stalin moved towards the more centralized conception of the Americans (Luard, 1982).

As in the case of the League, it was the Americans who provided the leadership in the construction of the new organization and who pursued their conception in the face of the doubts of the other key actors. On both occasions this situation was no more than a reflection of the balance of power among the respective sets of allies. There was, of course, an irony in this: while the collective security project was designed to remove dangerous national power competition from international relations, it was reliant on the dominating national power of its architect.

It was therefore largely an American plan that was put forward for discussion when allied representatives met to deal with the specifics of the proposed post-war organization in 1944. Meetings took place in between August and October at Dumbarton Oaks, an estate on the edge of Washington, DC. The key negotiators here were the Soviet and British ambassadors to the United States, Andrei Gromyko and Sir Alexander Cadogan, and the American assistant secretary of state, Edward Stettinius, who acted as chairman. Representatives of Nationalist China were also present, though they had a lesser role in the planning process. The objective of the Dumbarton Oaks talks was to reach a consensus among the four powers and then to present the wider anti-Axis alliance with an agreed blueprint for a new global organization.

Agreement was quickly reached on the basic institutional form of the United Nations, largely because the outline model of the League was available to be exploited. There would be a Security Council of eleven members.

(This would be increased to fifteen in the early 1960s to reflect the changing size and membership profile of the organization.) The Council was to consist of the five big anti-Axis powers: the United States, the Soviet Union, Britain, China and France (now admitted as a ‘fifth policeman’). These would be permanent members, each with the power of veto over Council decisions. In addition, six (later ten) non-permanent members without power of veto would be appointed on a rolling basis from the various regions of the world represented in the organization. All member states of the United Nations would have a seat in its General Assembly. Both the Council and the Assembly would be serviced by a secretariat of international civil servants.

A nascent system of collective security was also approved at Dumbarton Oaks. In outline this envisaged that disputes between members would in the first instance be settled by processes of negotiation, mediation and conciliation. If these failed, the problem would become the responsibility of the Security Council which would propose its own settlement terms. If this also failed, then the Council could apply economic and other sanctions against the ‘aggressor’ with, in the last resort, recourse to military action. All members of the United Nations would be required to commit themselves legally to undertake such action on the instructions of the Security Council. The Council would itself be advised on the strategic and operational aspects of these measures by a Military Staff Committee (MSC) made up of senior military representatives of its permanent members (Russell, 1958; Yoder, 1997).

Despite these quite wide areas of agreement among the powers, significant points remained at issue after Dumbarton Oaks. Some of these were essentially technical. There was dispute over the extent of the commitments to be required of UN members and the nature of preparedness and earmarking of national forces for UN service. More ominously, a profoundly important issue remained unresolved: the voting system in both General Assembly and Security Council which, by extension, touched on the question of national representation.

In the case of the General Assembly the Soviet Union sought representation for all sixteen of the constituent republics of the USSR. This would obviously have been a misuse of the concept of ‘sovereign equality’ on which the UN was to be based – the principle that all independent states in the international system should have equal rights and powers. The Soviet Union itself and not its component parts was obviously the sovereign power. But the Soviet position was in some ways understandable. Although the world had yet to fall into the extremes of cold war bipolarity between capitalist west and communist east, the rudiments of this global cleavage had been present virtually since the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. It did not take any great prescience on the part of Stalin and his representatives at Dumbarton Oaks to see east–west divisions as a major feature of the post-war international system – and therefore of the new global organization. The Soviet Union was at this time at an obvious disadvantage in terms of simple political arithmetic. The Dumbarton Oaks talks were held before the creation of the so-called ‘people’s democracies’ of eastern Europe and therefore of a communist bloc. The process of European decolonization which would change completely the composition of the United Nations was even further in the future. From the perspective of 1944–45 the USSR would obviously be ideologically isolated in the new organization.

The idea of sovereign equality had a certain moral force in an international system where states were personified as strong and weak individuals. In a world based on collectively secured ‘justice’, the rights of the weak should obviously be as great as those of the strong. But the international system was in reality composed of sovereign states with hugely divergent sizes of population and territory. In this real world, sovereign equality could be seen as fundamentally inequitable and ‘undemocratic’. Why should El Salvador (another founding member of the UN), say, have the same powers in the global polity as the incomparably larger and more populous Soviet Union?

Beyond the General Assembly there were divisions between the Soviet Union and the other big powers over the Security Council veto and the prerogatives of the five permanent members. There was no disagreement on the basic principle. The delegates at Dumbarton Oaks all agreed that the veto was a necessary mechanism. It was in fact an advance on the voting system operated at the League where unanimity was required before any action could be taken. The proposed UN veto was for the permanent members of the Security Council alone and would only be activated by a negative vote, not merely by abstention or absence. The difficulty which emerged at the talks was over restrictions on its use. The British and Americans argued that the veto should not be available to a permanent member when its own behavior was the subject of discussion. Aware of its political vulnerability in an overwhelmingly western institution, the Soviet Union insisted that the veto should be an absolute right of the great powers in all Security Council business other than the purely procedural.

Agreement on both these issues eluded the ambassadors at Dumbarton Oaks. Subsequent attempts to settle them in the remaining months of 1944 were also unsuccessful. The search for an agreement now passed up to the allied foreign ministers and heads of government rather than their ambassadors in Washington. In February 1945 a summit meeting took place at Yalta on Russia’s Black Sea coast. Soviet foreign minister Molotov gave some ground by accepting a restriction on the veto where ‘peaceful settlement’ rather than collective security ‘enforcement’ in issues affecting permanent members were under discussion. With rather more difficulty, a compromise was also reached on the issue of General Assembly representation. It was accepted that the Soviet Union could have two further seats for the republics of Ukraine and Byelorussia. Roosevelt agreed to this only reluctantly, having at one point threatened to demand separate representation for all of the (then) forty-eight states of the United States if Stalin did not give way (Yoder, 1997). These relatively small western concessions, though, were seen as a reasonable price for progress towards the inauguration of the new organization.

This advance on the plans for the new organization was reflected in the final communiqué of the Yalta meeting. Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill pronounced that:

We are resolved upon the earliest possible establishment with our allies of a general international organization to maintain peace and security. We believe that this is essential, both to prevent aggression and to remove the political, economic, and social causes of war through the close and continuing collaboration of all peace-loving peoples.

The foundations were laid at Dumbarton Oaks. On the important question of voting procedure, however, agreement was not there reached. The present Conference has been able to resolve this difficulty. We have agreed that a conference of United Nations should be called to meet at San Francisco in the United States on April 25, 1945, to prepare the charter of such an organization, along the lines proposed in the informal conversations at Dumbarton Oaks. (Yalta Agreement)

In preparation for the San Francisco meeting the presumed permanent members of the new Security Council sent out invitations to fifty states who were then anti-Axis belligerents. This was a status acquired only very recently by some of these countries as the outcome of the war had become plain and the prizes that went with being on the winning side beckoned. This swelled the ranks of founding members, bolstering the ideal of universality of membership. The absence of such universality, it will be recalled, had been a major defect of the League system.

Franklin Roosevelt died ten days before the opening of the San Francisco session but his successor, Harry Truman, immediately affirmed his own and America’s commitment to the new organization. This was greeted with relief among many who had feared a repeat of the isolationist spasm which ended American participation at a similar stage in the development of the League. In reality, however, the prevailing trend in American politics in 1944 and 1945 was if anything anti-isolationist. Roosevelt’s Democratic administration had already worked to ensure a bipartisan approach with the Republicans in Congress. Edward Stettinius, who had led the Dumbarton Oaks talks, had been elevated to the post of secretary of state. He now cooperated closely with the Republicans’ principal foreign affairs adviser (and future secretary of state), John Foster Dulles, who accepted an invitation to participate in the San Francisco conference (Divine, 1974).

Driven on by the ‘big five’, whose authority was enhanced by their leadership of the huge military alliance poised on the verge of final victory in mid-1945, the San Francisco conference (held in the city’s Opera House) confirmed the decisions taken at Dumbarton Oaks and Yalta. The structure of the institution, familiar in outline to most of the participants from their League experience, was accepted without dissent. Similarly, the basic constitution of the United Nations, its Charter, was adopted with only marginal and technical modifications. Having been ratified by the five governments of the permanent members, the Charter came into force and the United Nations became a political and legal reality on 24 October 1945.

Atlantic Charter: Anglo- American declaration of August 1941 setting out joint aspirations for the post-war international system including the creation of a new collective security system.

Tehran Conference: Meeting of allied leaders in November 1943 in the capital of Iran, at which early ideas for the creation of a post-war global organization were discussed.

Enforcement measures: Military action designed to secure a predetermined outcome against an aggressor; contrasts with peacekeeping which seeks to manage conflicts rather than force a particular conclusion to them.

Dumbarton Oaks: Washington venue for the planning of the new United Nations by representatives of the major allied powers between August and October 1944.

Veto: The power held by each of the five permanent members in the Security Council individually to prevent action being taken on any non procedural matter with which it might disagree regardless of the position of the majority.

MSC: Military Staff Committee, composed of the chiefs of staff of the five permanent members of the Security Council responsible under article 47 of the UN Charter for control of military enforcement actions; never properly operational.

Bipolarity: The configuration of the international system in two dominant, ideologically opposed blocs (or poles); characteristic of the cold war period.

Yalta Conference: Meeting of allied leaders at the Russian Black Sea resort in February 1945 where, among other postwar plans, the proposals which emerged from the Dumbarton Oaks discussions for the new United Nations were discussed at head of government level.

Universality: The principle of open and comprehensive membership of international organizations (a general characteristic of the United Nations).