Testimony by Timothy E. Wirth
President, The United Nations Foundation
and The Better World Fund
February 13, 2007
Committee on Foreign Affairs
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC
Thank you,
Mr. Chairman and greetings to the members of the
Committee. It is a privilege to be with you today
and to participate on this panel with such distinguished
colleagues. Senator Mitchell’s leadership
of our country and around the world is well known
and he is respected here and internationally for
not only the content, but also the tenor of his
wisdom. I also want to take this opportunity to
thank Ambassador Bolton for his recently completed
service as Permanent Representative of the United
States to the United Nations. He was a tireless
and plainspoken representative of the Administration,
and few U.S. Ambassadors have been as knowledgeable
about the intricacies of the UN or worked as hard
as Ambassador Bolton.
Today’s hearing comes at a time of great
challenge and opportunity for the world.
In the United States and around the globe, there
is a pervasive sense that the world is stuck.
On the economic front, trade talks and the fight
to eradicate poverty are stuck. On the security
front, the international community has not forged
the will necessary to give meaning to the recently
agreed “responsibility to protect,”
and, therefore, genocide continues to unfold in
Darfur. The search for peace in the Middle East
is stuck, and the situation in Iraq is central
to this condition. Global non-proliferation efforts
are stuck. And efforts to address perhaps the
greatest long-term challenge, global climate change,
are similarly bogged down.
Overall, it seems fair to observe that there is
little sense of common purpose around the world.
In fact, the reality is that misunderstandings
among countries and cultures appear to be growing.
But within these challenges and complexities lie
great opportunities for the United States –
this Administration and this Congress –
to find common ground and to forge common cause
with the international community. Especially by
working with and helping to lead the United Nations,
our nation has the opportunity to lead the world
in addressing forthrightly, fairly and without
fear the great global challenges of the 21st century.
Let me begin, Mr. Chairman, by noting that the
planets are lining up for something of a “multilateral
moment.” Every day, it is more and more
apparent that the great global challenges of the
21st century – from terrorism and proliferation
to climate change and poverty – require
international cooperation. Even if one wanted
to pay all the bills or take all the risks, these
cross-cutting global issues demonstrate that no
single government and no single sector is capable
of solving these challenges alone. There must
be a global partnership – public and private,
North and South. New global partnerships can help
to clear the path to a more peaceful, prosperous
and just world in the 21st century.
The rationale for global partnerships and working
through the United Nations is three-fold: burdensharing,
effectiveness and reputation.
Burdensharing: It is far cheaper
for the United States and other nations to share
the costs and burdens of international security
than it is to go it alone. Most U.S. taxpayer
dollars spent through the United Nations and other
major multilateral institutions are leveraged
three-fold or more. So when the U.S. puts 25 cents
towards a UN project, the rest of the world generally
adds in 75 cents. For example, when Representatives
Rohrbacher and Delahunt asked the Government Accountability
Office to do a cost comparison of U.S.- and UN-led
peacekeeping, the GAO found that UN peacekeeping
was at least eight times less expensive than fielding
American forces. So using UN peacekeeping costs
eight times less – and keeps American soldiers
out of harms way. Similar multipliers are found
in refugee assistance, global health, food assistance
and disaster relief. Cooperation with the UN is
a bargain.
Effective Problem-Solving: The
efficacy of international cooperation is a second
rationale: the challenges faced by the United
States and the world today simply cannot be addressed
solely by the United States or any other nation.
• We can’t fully succeed in combating
terrorism without a global effort.
• The global effort to eliminate poverty
and reach the Millennium Development Goals will
never be successful without broad public and private
efforts or without effective global norms and
institutions.
• The urgency of climate change demands
a global effort of unprecedented diplomacy and
economic cooperation. It doesn’t matter
if carbon is emitted in Denver or Delhi; we all
bake together and we are all going to have to
solve it together and we have lost a decade.
• The instruments for managing nuclear proliferation
need to be renewed and strengthened. Our neglect
of decades of cooperative work has helped to speed
the erosion of global cooperation and trust. We
need to reverse course and return to broad and
trusting cooperation.
Public Diplomacy: Third, at a
time when every measure shows that global opinion
of the U.S. has been flagging, getting our relationship
right with the UN would contribute substantially
to the improved status of the United States worldwide.
A recent poll by the BBC across 25 countries found
that nearly one person in two (49%) feels the
U.S. is playing a mainly negative role in the
world. The UN is the world’s stage, and
our priorities and actions at the UN – whether
we pay our dues or listen carefully to the views
of others – have real consequence. Fulfilling
our financial commitments to the UN and making
every effort to play a constructive role there
will go a long way toward alleviating any misunderstandings
about the U.S. as an example of compassion and
tolerance, justice and freedom, peace and cooperation.
On January 1, Ban Ki-moon became Secretary-General
of the UN. A product of the South Korean success
story and inspired in part by President Kennedy,
Mr. Ban brings a fresh perspective to the UN.
Selected with the support of the United States
and with the unanimous endorsement of the membership
of the UN, the new Secretary-General has identified
the right priorities for the first leg of his
tenure:
• restoring a spirit of cooperation among
the UN member states,
• encouraging peace in the Middle East,
• curtailing proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction in places like North Korea and
Iran,
• stopping the genocide in Darfur,
• breaking the logjam surrounding UN reform
efforts, and
• engaging the UN more aggressively in the
issues of energy and climate.
The new Secretary-General has also clearly signaled
his understanding of the importance of a strong,
productive relationship between the UN and its
largest financial contributor, the United States.
His first steps have been impressive and sophisticated.
• his early and productive engagement with
President Bush, senior Administration officials
and the leadership of Congress and this Committee;
• his appointment last week of an American
to the post of Under-Secretary-General for Political
Affairs, the position once held by the great American
Ralph Bunche;
• his fast and forthright response to the
U.S. request for investigation of certain activities
in North Korea;
• his precedent-setting move to make his
financial disclosure statement public; and
• his commitment to acting swiftly and decisively
on UN reorganization and reform, including the
strong management controls and practices that
have been a priority agenda item for the United
States.
These initiatives can be solidified by the quick
confirmation and arrival of Ambassador Khalilzad
as the U.S. Permanent Representative at the UN.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, this Congress is starting
anew and with many new Members bringing a fresh
perspective to international affairs. In this
regard, I note your gracious reception of the
new Secretary-General here in Washington last
month and efforts to introduce him to policy,
business and civic leaders in the Capitol.
With this background, it is fair to ask what we
all need to do to help reach the promise of a
strengthened global partnership between the United
States and the United Nations. Americans know
the UN can do better. But extensive public opinion
polling over the last fifty years shows that the
vast majority of Americans
• Value the UN,
• They want to share our burdens,
• They want a stronger and more effective
UN,
• And they want the U.S. and the UN to cooperate
together in solving the world’s problems.
While this relationship has had its ups and downs,
and while the UN often doesn’t tell its
story very well and is a juicy target for political
attack, again most Americans are supportive and
hopeful about the UN, with good cause:
• The list of UN accomplishments is long,
and the record that I have attached to my testimony
is strong, mostly little understood, but reflective
of what the U.S. and the UN have done together.
• The vast majority of the UN’s dedicated
workforce (some 63,450 people worldwide in the
UN system, less than the United States' Department
of Education or the workforce of the Coca Cola
Company) are working around the world to help
feed, shelter, educate, and immunize people in
abject need. A few may have parking tickets, but
most aren’t even in places with street lights
or parking meters.
• The UN’s peacekeeping missions (which
have grown to include some 100,000 troops) now
bring a collective armed force – second
in size only to the U.S. – to some of the
most conflict ridden places in the world, places
where we have a stake, but don’t want to
go. The cost of all 18 of these critical, life-saving
missions is less than the transportation budget
for the State of Virginia – and the cost
to the United States is only one quarter of that.
• In some 60 countries, UN staff are helping
nations develop democratic systems of governance,
from the elections in Iraq, to building an impressive
and lasting governing coalition in Afghanistan,
stabilizing fragile conditions in many West African
countries, and holding steady the Haitian challenge
right off our shores. We want them to succeed,
and they are accepted by and have more legitimacy
to work with nascent governments than the United
States or any other government could muster alone.
As I said before, the UN is not always good at
telling its own story. And of course it isn’t
perfect – no bureaucracy is. But the UN
is not the caricature – the dysfunctional,
bloated or corrupt institution – that its
most shrill opponents depict. Even the complex
Oil-for-Food issue was distorted and blown out
of proportion. The truth is that the UN’s
record of accomplishment dwarfs – yes, dwarfs
– its blemishes. And the truth is that key
international affairs objectives of the United
States have been advanced through the UN.
All of this background, Mr. Chairman, may help
to illuminate the importance of the next steps
that the U.S. can and must take. Together, the
Administration and the Congress have an opportunity
to strengthen – rapidly and effectively
– the UN as an institution and the important
U.S.-UN relationship. Everyone will benefit.
I think the agenda for action has at least 10
points that deserve attention:
1. Rebuild Trust. Above all else,
Mr. Chairman, I would argue that the new Secretary-General
has it right – that the central challenge
is one of rebuilding a spirit of partnership and
trust at the United Nations. None of the opportunities
related to UN reforms and international cooperation
are going to happen unless we can collectively
create an environment of trust. This must be the
top priority. I am happy to sense a potential
change in tenor on the part of American political
leaders towards this essential institution.
2. Reform. Second, is the reform
agenda. The United States Institute of Peace (or
Gingrich-Mitchell) report has underscored the
importance of the UN and the importance of change
and reform so that the UN has the appropriate
systems and structures in place to handle the
demands of the 21st century. Secretary-General
Kofi Annan and the U.S. government were determined
to enact a substantial number of management reforms
at the UN last year and some significant progress
was made.
• Additional resources were provided for
UN oversight;
• The General Assembly passed plans to improve
UN financial tracking and information technology
systems;
• New ethics and financial disclosure regulations
were established;
• A Central Emergency Response Fund, Peacebuilding
Commission, and Democracy Fund were created;
• The old Human Rights Commission was abolished
and replaced by a new Human Rights Council –
which for the first time requires nations to run
UN-wide to get admission onto a UN human rights
body; and
• Finally and largely unnoticed in the press,
the United Nations has been pressing ahead with
a plan to streamline and consolidate UN field
operations in five pilot countries and is hopeful
that this so-called “ONE UN” approach
to delivering services will save hundreds of millions
of dollars and improve outcomes in the field –
where UN services count most.
Unfortunately, some of the more structural reform
efforts, especially changes in the budget and
personnel systems, were stalled last year. Member
States were close to agreeing on an overall framework
for mandate review to proceed, until a few governments
(including the United States) expressed reservations.
These significant reform issues need to be taken
up again and are a priority for the new Secretary-General
and key Member States. None of these changes will
occur without persistent, diplomatic leadership
from the United States.
3. Security Council: Hovering
behind many of the reform and budget efforts is
the awkward issue of Security Council reform.
The U.S. push for reforms last year excluded this
major issue from the overall UN reform umbrella.
Therefore, the push for reform was often perceived
by many members of the UN as an effort to curtail
the General Assembly without concomitantly addressing
issues related to the Security Council. These
concerns were exacerbated by the imposition of
the budget cap, which was similarly perceived
as an effort by a smaller group of donor countries
to condition UN funding on a specific agenda.
This approach was not successful, and the U.S.
garnered only limited buy-in from much of the
rest of the world, even though it was broadly
recognized – including among the G-77 –
that the UN needed improved personnel, managerial,
and oversight systems.
I’m hopeful that the presence of a new U.S.
Ambassador to the UN, a new Secretary-General
with fresh staff, the experienced leadership of
Deputy Secretary-Designate Negroponte, and a renewed
multilateral approach to American foreign policy
will enable the U.S. to take another and broader
cut at UN reform. Even if the P-5 cannot agree
on modes for Security Council reform this year,
we ought to at least recognize that this central
reform needs further, serious exploration. If
we could do this, I expect we’d find a much
deeper well of support for management reform among
the G-77.
4. Funding: It's time for the
U.S. to pay its bills to the UN on time and in
full. You will remember, Mr. Chairman, the funding
crisis of the late 1990s, during which the U.S.
was more than one billion dollars in arrears at
the UN. Through the work of this committee, the
Helms-Biden compromise, and the personal financial
contributions of Ted Turner that crisis was averted
and the U.S. returned to a modicum of stability
in its financial relationship with the UN.
Unfortunately, we are already heading back down
this familiar deficit path. Our estimate is that
the U.S. now has about $770 million in structural
arrearages at the UN, and the recent budget submission
by the Administration would make the situation
even worse. This year’s proposed budget
short-changes three key UN accounts. In the International
Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account,
the budget envisions reductions, including a dramatic
30% cut for the UN Development Program. In the
Contributions to International Peacekeeping (CIPA)
account, the budget leaves the United States with
a $500 million shortfall for its commitments.
And in the Contributions to International Organizations
(CIO) account, the budget leaves the U.S. $130
million too short – meaning that the State
Department will have to determine which U.S. treaty
obligations will go unmet among 44 treaty-based
international organizations, whether that means
short-changing the UN, or WHO or another organization.
These deficits would be especially damaging now,
just after the U.S. completed a very complicated
budget negotiation at the UN, in which the U.S.
had to work very hard to maintain the current
level of assessment.
Part of this arrears issue is the U.S. debt at
the UN arising from the gap between the U.S. assessed
levels for UN peacekeeping operations (27% until
January 2007, when the U.S. assessment rate was
reduced to 26%) and an outdated, congressionally-mandated
25% cap on peacekeeping expenditures. The U.S.
negotiated the higher ceiling and has voted for
every peacekeeping mission. Yet in effect, the
U.S. is saying that while it votes yes, it won’t
pay. This is not sustainable; this is not good
budgeting; and this is not good diplomacy.
5. Peacekeeping: Beyond funding,
the U.S. should support the structures of UN peacekeeping
with whatever logistical support we can provide.
UN peacekeeping has tripled in size to record
levels because of Security Council requests in
recent years; 2007 finds the Department of Peacekeeping
Operations (DPKO) over-stretched, under-staffed
and in need of new mechanisms to facilitate flexibility
and deployments for missions like the joint AU-UN
one to Darfur. The U.S. does not generally provide
troops for UN peacekeeping forces but can and
should help to enhance DPKO operations –
whether that is in helping to streamline managerial
structures in New York or providing advice on
intelligence or doctrine development.
6. Israel and the UN: It is a
most opportune time to get right Israel’s
relationships at the United Nations. The new Secretary-General
has signaled his appreciation for this fact, which
was also a priority for Secretary-General Annan.
The adoption of the U.S.-led holocaust resolution
and the second annual holocaust observance at
the UN were positive steps. But more can be done.
I would encourage the Administration to push as
a matter of diplomatic priority for the full,
permanent, and world-wide inclusion of Israel
in the Western European and Others (WEOG) regional
group at the United Nations. The problematic nature
of Israel’s relationship at the UN is a
festering sore that inhibits a full and constructive
U.S. approach to the UN.
7. Climate Change: The rapid
emergence of the climate issue will require much
greater attention from the United States. In 1992,
the U.S. Senate ratified the basic climate treaty
(The Framework Convention on Climate Change) and
led the negotiations for the first steps toward
implementation (The Kyoto Protocol – 1997).
Little has happened in the last 10 years, while
the scientific evidence has solidified, global
carbon markets have grown, and an increasing number
of global U.S. companies are asking for decisions
and long-term predictability for a carbon-constrained
economy. As the home of the Climate Convention,
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
and a number of diverse agency actions and norm-setting
requirements, the UN will be a major factor in
the needed international negotiations, and the
climate issue has been identified as an important
priority by the new Secretary-General. The U.S.
should support and help to lead these important
efforts.
8. Darfur and the Responsibility to Protect:
Darfur will haunt the international community
as Rwanda has for the last decade, especially
if no resolution is reached on the organizational
efforts necessary to implement the concept of
“The Responsibility to Protect.” While
much has been written about the need, implementation
steps have been elusive and will require careful
diplomacy and close cooperation between the U.S.
and the UN – and I commend the U.S. Presidential
Special Envoy to Sudan, Andrew Natsios’s
recent efforts in this area.
9. Reengaging on Key International Treaties:
The United States also has much to gain –
substantively and diplomatically – by reengaging
in key treaties and other cooperative international
efforts. Ratifying the long-delayed Law of the
Sea Treaty and the Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women would
be very positively received around the world.
Similarly, your prospective legislation, Mr. Chairman,
to support the creation of an international nuclear
fuel bank could provide a significant boost to
the world’s flagging non-proliferation regimes
– which is another major opportunity for
global partnership. In this regard, Mr. Chairman,
our sister organization in the Turner philanthropic
network, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, led by
the distinguished former Senator Sam Nunn, is
a global leader and has a whole series of recommendations
for enhancing cooperative efforts on non-proliferation.
10. Human Rights: For three years,
steps have been taken to reform the human rights
machinery in the UN. Unfortunately, the U.S. chose
not to participate in the new Human Rights Council,
making it less likely that the new organization
can become the effective voice needed in the international
community. Congress can help by reviewing this
decision and urging the Administration to run
for the new Council this year.
Of course there are other initiatives to pursue
to strengthen the U.S.-UN relationship. For example,
agreement on the finance package to rehabilitate
the aging UN plant is close to completion. A new
privately financed Visitor Center can be one of
a number of measures designed to encourage the
UN’s relationship with its host, New York
City. And this Committee can encourage the State
Department to review the financial package available
to Foreign Service Officers working in New York
City, so that the highest quality officers continue
to be attracted to the important UN assignments.
I also applaud the Administration's efforts to
harness the talent and idealism of the American
people by continuing to do its utmost to help
Americans get jobs at the UN. The more Americans
get jobs at the UN, the better the UN's understanding
of the United States, and vice versa.
Conclusion:
Mr. Chairman, the global challenges that lie ahead
are daunting -- but those same challenges present
us with a golden opportunity to improve and strengthen
the UN and reorient American foreign policy for
the better.
Let’s seize this moment. The allies of the
United States and, indeed, the world are looking
to you and the Administration for leadership.
It is imperative for the U.S., the world’s
leader, to engage to meet these global challenges.
Let’s show our support for the United Nations
and other international institutions by paying
our dues on time and in full. Let’s lend
legitimacy to multilateral institutions by supporting
and abiding by their rules and procedures. In
Iraq, North Korea, Iran and Darfur, the UN system
is advancing U.S. interests. Let’s give
the UN and other multilateral institutions the
resources they need to do their work effectively.
Immediate legislative action to remove the peacekeeping
cap will send a signal that our new strategy embraces
international collaboration and alliances.
The principles of the United Nations and the multilateral
system are the principles of equality, democracy,
and law. They are the principles of the United
States. For more than sixty years, they and the
multilateral system have provided the mechanisms
through which the world’s leaders have contemplated,
discussed and solved global problems.
Let’s use our influence, Mr. Chairman, from
the Congress and the President on down, to revitalize
and support the UN and our other multilateral
institutions.
History demands nothing less of us.
APPENDIX 1
ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE VALUE
OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Maintaining Peace.
A 2005 RAND study compared the effectiveness of
sixteen U.S. and UN-led peace missions and found
the UN to be almost twice as effective. In seven
out of eight missions, UN peacekeeping got to
the end goals of peace and stability; the U.S.-led
missions succeeded in only four of eight missions.
RAND attributed the UN's greater success to its
deeper experience at peace making and nation building
and to the fact that the UN left a softer footprint
than U.S.-deployed missions. The U.S. and the
world have, of course, implicitly recognized this
by voting for dramatic expansions for UN peacekeeping
in the past few years – virtually tripling
the number of UN forces deployed around the world
and opening missions in key places like Lebanon
and Haiti.
The World’s 9-1-1 Service.
The same sort of success can be seen in UN-led
humanitarian efforts. After the Indian Ocean Tsunami
of 2004, the UN and its agencies built 200 health
care centers, rebuilt 25,000 permanent shelters,
fed 2 million people, provided safe drinking water
to 1.5 million people, and vaccinated 2.5 million
children for measles. After the earthquake that
struck the Pakistan-India border, UN relief agencies,
such as OCHA, the World Food Program, the World
Health Organization, the UN Children’s Fund
(UNICEF), and the UN Refugee Agency worked through
the winter to provide food, health, shelter, and
education for millions of displaced persons. And
in the Darfur region, the UN is helping more than
2.5 million war-affected persons, despite government
restrictions and the direct targeting of humanitarian
workers. As a result, there has been a two-thirds
reduction of deaths among internally displaced
persons. The World Food Program, for example,
is feeding between 2.3 and 2.8 million people
every day and has cut malnutrition rates in half.
In fact, 30 million people in 50 countries today
depend on UN relief agencies for their survival.
Combating Disease.
In health programs, the UN coordinates a number
of programs to combat diseases like AIDS, avian
flu, polio, measles, and malaria. To tout just
a few: the UN has recently expanded access to
anti-retroviral AIDS therapy ten-fold in Sub-Saharan
Africa; an FAO program eliminated human cases
of avian flu in Vietnam last year, though Vietnam
was previously one of the world’s hardest
hit nations; a UN-led partnership reduced the
number of reported polio cases from 350,000 to
less than 2,000 -- a drop of more than 99 percent;
a UN-led program has helped cut measles deaths
worldwide by sixty percent, saving the lives of
seven and a half million children between 1999
and 2005; and the UN and its agencies are providing
tools and programs to prevent the death of the
500,000 women worldwide during pregnancy or childbirth.
Monitoring and Reigning in WMD.
In the key area of non-proliferation, the United
Nations system serves as the world's principal
platform for stemming and tracking the proliferation
of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
A key agency in this, of course, is the International
Atomic Energy Agency, which was established at
the United States’ recommendation in 1957.
Since the 1990s, the IAEA has undertaken inspections
and investigations of suspected violators of the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; it currently
inspects nuclear facilities in over 140 nations.
In 2003, IAEA verification efforts unmasked Libya’s
hidden nuclear weapons program. Libya has since
renounced this program. The IAEA also assists
member states in securing radioactive sources
that might otherwise end up in the hands of terrorists
and detecting and interdicting against illegal
trafficking of materials. As a result, over 100
radioactive sources have been identified and secured.
Sanctioning Rogue States.
In the Security Council, the UN is working to
impose sanctions regimes to reign in countries
like Iran, North Korea, and Sudan that are operating
outside international legal norms. There is evidence
that such sanctions work. UN sanctions are widely
credited with bringing an end to Libya’s
WMD program. Following North Korea’s nuclear
test in October, the Security Council imposed
a series of economic and commercial sanctions.
North Korea subsequently agreed to return to six-party
diplomatic talks. On December 23, 2006, the Security
Council unanimously approved a resolution with
sanctions intended to freeze Iran’s nuclear
program. The resolution bans the import and export
of materials and technology that could be used
to enrich or process uranium or construct ballistic
missiles. The Security Council has also frozen
the assets of 22 Iranian officials and institutions
and imposed targeted sanctions on Sudanese individuals.
Advocating for the World’s Environment.
In the environment, negotiations conducted through
the United Nations’ Montreal Protocol motivated
the world’s governments to restrict the
release of ozone-depleting chemicals. As a result,
there has been a measurable shrinking in the size
of the ozone hole over the earth. The recently
released Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
brought together 2,500 scientists from 130 nations,
including the U.S., to draw attention to and increase
pressure for action on global warming.
Promoting Global Development.
The United Nations established and has been promoting
the Millennium Development Goals, eight markers
aimed at eradicating extreme poverty and hunger,
achieving universal education, promoting gender
equality, reducing child mortality, combating
disease, and ensuring environmental sustainability
by 2015. The United Nations’ seminal Human
Development Report moved the world’s governments
to take into account factors like the quality
of life and political freedoms in determining
what promotes or inhibits economic growth and
development.
Promoting Democratic Norms.
The United Nations is the world’s leading
agency for promoting representative democracy.
More than half of the world’s nations have
relied on the UN for support in holding and monitoring
elections, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Liberia
and Congo. The United Nations has also just created
a Democracy Fund and is disbursing money to 125
projects in support of civil society and democracy
around the globe.
Allowing for International Commerce and Travel.
The United Nations system includes several smaller
organizations that are maintaining rules and protocols
for the international delivery of mail, civil
aviation, shipping, and weather tracking and reporting.
Without these UN agencies, U.S. citizens could
not mail a package to Kinshasa, get on a cruise
ship to Greece, or fly to Europe without the threat
of collision or uncertain landing rights.
Extending Diplomacy in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
Finally, in Iraq and Afghanistan today, the United
Nations is providing key diplomatic platforms
where the United States’ reach has been
limited. In Iraq in 2005, the UN registered 15
million voters for three successful elections,
coordinated over 7,000 candidates in 300 political
parties, and organized 150,000 election workers.
More than this, though, the UN has helped bridge
political divides within the country. In 2003,
a UN special envoy helped to broker the peaceful
transition of power from U.S.-led forces to the
Iraqi government. And last year, the UN's Special
Representative in Iraq helped end a political
impasse between Sunnis and Shi’ites that
was preventing the formation of a unity government.
In Afghanistan, too, the UN and its agencies –
notably UNDP – have taken the lead in holding
democratic elections and raising over $13 billion
in international aid.
APPENDIX 2
UN SUCCESS STORIES FROM 2006
Maintaining the ceasefire in Lebanon.
After the ceasefire was accepted in mid-August
2006, the United Nations quickly increased the
number of peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, allowing
the Israeli army to pull back and Lebanese army
to deploy to the border for the first time in
decades. No serious breach of the ceasefire has
occurred since; the UN discovered dozens of arms
caches while monitoring for arms shipments.
Bringing a warlord to justice and inspiring democracy
in Liberia.
In 2006 the United Nations helped bring to justice
Liberian warlord Charles Taylor, who helped ignite
a civil war that killed almost 150,000 people.
The UN subsequently assisted in holding free elections
and inaugurating Africa's first democratically
elected female president, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf.
Aiding millions displaced by conflict in Darfur.
Despite attacks on humanitarian aid workers, the
World Food Program fed over 6.1 million people
this year in southern Sudan, Darfur and eastern
Chad, and the UN provided water, shelter, health
care, and other necessities, thereby reducing
deaths among the internally displaced by two-thirds.
Educating women in Afghanistan.
The Joint Partnership on Adult Functional Literacy,
an endeavor of the Government of Afghanistan and
UN agencies, launched a literacy program this
year, which reached an estimated 160,000 Afghans,
mostly women.
Responding to nuclear threats in North Korea and
Iran.
The Security Council took action this year against
Iran and North Korea. Following North Korea’s
nuclear test on October 9, 2006, the Security
Council imposed a series of economic and commercial
sanctions. North Korea subsequently agreed to
return to six-party talks. On December 23, 2006,
the Security Council unanimously approved sanctions
intended to freeze Iran’s nuclear program.
Supporting local democracy initiatives around
the world.
The UN Democracy Fund distributed grants to its
first 125 recipients last year, including a program
in Afghanistan to create voter ID cards and three
programs in Iraq, including one to create an independent
nationwide news agency.
Working to eradicate polio through vaccination
campaigns.
Due to a UN-led effort, polio was officially eliminated
in Egypt and Niger in 2006, reducing the number
of nations with active polio cases to four. Since
1988, the number of polio cases reported each
year has declined more than 99%
Protecting World Heritage Sites for future
generations.
UNESCO added 28 new World Heritage Sites last
year, including the Mapelo Flora and Fauna Sanctuary
in Colombia. World Heritage Sites are places around
the world that have been internationally recognized
for their outstanding value as natural and cultural
treasures. These new sites will now be a focal
point for sustainable tourism and development
and will support local job creation.
Guarding against
Avian Flu.
The UN is working globally to contain avian flu.
As a result of the work of the Food and Agricultural
Organization, Vietnam went from being especially
hard hit to having no recorded human cases. In
2006, the World Health Organization also continued
to help develop national preparedness plans to
contain a possible pandemic outbreak.
