Interfaith
Prayers for Peace at the Vatican
|
|
|
By UPF International
|
Sunday, June 08, 2014
|
UPF applauds the peace initiative
taken by Pope Francis during his visit to the Holy Land in May. He met with
both Israeli and Palestinian leaders as well as visited sacred and historic
sites and held outdoor masses. On the second day, he invited Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres to join him at the
Vatican on June 8 to pray together for peace. He begged his hosts to end a
conflict he said was “no longer acceptable.”
UPF encourages both religious and
political leaders to transcend historical self-interests and pursue the ideal
of “One family under God.” Since the dawn of history, human beings have
sought to understand their origins and their destiny, giving rise to
religions centered on revelation, sacred texts and understandings of truth
and goodness. Wherever there has been human society, there has been religion.
While there has frequently been misunderstanding, competition, and conflict
among believers of various religious traditions, most sacred teachings are
shared by believers across the spectrum of the world's religions.
"Peace is a gift of God, but requires
our efforts. Let us be people of peace in prayer and deed," Pope Francis
tweeted regarding the June 8, 2014 prayer meeting. "Prayer is
all-powerful. Let us use it to bring peace to the Middle East and peace to
the world."
Dialogue that fosters mutual
understanding, respect and cooperation can contribute to peace and human
development. This initiative by Pope Francis is an example of how religions
can become a leading force for peace in this world.
|
=========================================================================
Ukraine rejects Putin's offer of gas discounts
Russian President Vladimir Putin
chairs a government meeting that focused on economic and social issues in the
Novo-Ogaryovo residence outside Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, June 11, 2014.
Ukraine on Wednesday rejected Russia’s offer of discount for gas shipments,
which President Vladimir Putin touted as a “partnership deal.” RIA-Novosti,
Alexei Druzhinin, Presidential Press Service / AP Photo
Image 1 of 6
By
JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG and NATALIYA VASILYEVA
The
Associated Press
MOSCOW -- Russia on Wednesday
offered to restore the discounted gas price it granted Ukraine under the ousted
pro-Russian president, but Ukraine demanded an even better deal and called for
arbitration to settle the dispute.
Speaking in Moscow, Russian
President Vladimir Putin said Russia was offering the discount as a
"partnership deal." Russia's energy minister, Alexander Novak,
specified the price offered as $385 per 1,000 cubic meters of gas.
"We believe that our offer is
more than in a partnership spirit, aimed to support the Ukrainian economy at a
rather difficult time," Putin said in televised remarks. "But if our
offers are rejected it means we will enter another stage. This is not our
choice. We do not want it."
Russia and Ukraine have been locked
for months in a dispute over the price of Russian gas supplies and Ukraine's
debt for previous deliveries. Moscow has threatened to turn off the tap if
Ukraine fails to settle the multibillion-dollar debt, but has repeatedly pushed
back the deadline after Ukraine paid off part of the sum.
European Union-brokered talks
between the two countries in Brussels on Wednesday failed to reach a compromise
over the price.
The bruising gas dispute comes amid
continuing fighting in eastern Ukraine, where government forces have battled
pro-Russian rebels for two months. The insurgents have pushed for joining Russia
following Moscow's annexation of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula in March, but
Putin has ignored their appeal in an apparent bid to avoid another round of
crippling Western sanctions.
Putin also seemed eager to avoid
cutting off gas to Ukraine, a move that would likely disrupt shipments to
European customers via pipelines crossing Ukrainian territory.
He emphasized Wednesday that the
latest offer would restore the price Ukraine had under pro-Russian President
Viktor Yanukovych.
In December, Russia offered Ukraine
an even lower price of $268 as it sought to give a financial lifeline to
Yanukovych, who was facing massive protests triggered by his decision to ditch
a pact with the European Union and opt for closer ties with Moscow.
After Yanukovych was chased from
power in February, Russia denounced his ouster as a "coup" and
annulled all gas discounts, bringing the price back to $485 per 1,000 cubic
meters, in line with a 2009 contract.
Ukraine has refused to pay for
Russian gas, calling the price politically motivated and demanding that Moscow
lower it.
Ukraine's Energy Minister Yuri
Prodan told reporters after the talks in Brussels that the price discount
offered by Russia isn't enough and demanded an even lower price. He said the
Ukrainian government now believes that arbitration is the best option to solve
the dispute.
Prodan, however, added that Ukraine
is open to talks to hammer out a temporary price while arbitration is
proceeding.
Despite the sharp disagreements, EU
Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger, who is involved in the talks, said he
hopes the parties will make progress in the next 48 hours.
"I can see movement on both
sides, and both sides will need to continue to move," he told reporters.
"There are differences of opinion ... and we're talking about
billions."
Oettinger said that he has drawn up
a draft agreement on the EU's behalf that he hopes both Russia and Ukraine can
ultimately agree to, including a temporary "$385 minus" price tag.
He said the final price will depend
on two factors: the volume of Russian gas purchased by Ukraine, and the length
of the agreement, which he has suggested should be 15 months. That would be
enough for Ukraine to see through the winter of 2014-2015 and allow it to build
up its reserves for another winter.
Oettinger said that Putin and
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko are to discuss the issue, but the Kremlin
said there is no immediate plan for such talks.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy
Yatsenyuk earlier Wednesday said that Kiev initially rejected the Russian offer
because there was no guarantee that it would last. Putin and Novak responded by
saying that Russia was ready to guarantee the discounts would remain in place
for one year.
Gazprom, Russia's gas giant, gave
Ukraine a few more days to settle its gas debt before it would start demanding
prepayment for gas, without which it has threatened to cut off supplies.
Gazprom's CEO Alexei Miller said the deadline would be pushed forward to next
Monday.
Georg Zachmann, a research fellow at
Bruegel, a Brussels-based think tank that specializes in economic affairs, said
that despite the impasse, Russia and Ukraine will likely finally come to
agreement.
"There are large sums of money
involved so they are fighting hard for that," Zachmann said. But in the
end, he said, "everybody would lose" from a cutoff of Russian gas to
Ukraine that could also disrupt supplies to the EU.
Dahlburg reported from Brussels.
Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow contributed to this report.
Ukraine rejects Putin's offer of gas discounts
Russian President Vladimir Putin
chairs a government meeting that focused on economic and social issues in the
Novo-Ogaryovo residence outside Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, June 11, 2014.
Ukraine on Wednesday rejected Russia’s offer of discount for gas shipments,
which President Vladimir Putin touted as a “partnership deal.” RIA-Novosti,
Alexei Druzhinin, Presidential Press Service / AP Photo
Image 1 of 6
By
JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG and NATALIYA VASILYEVA
The
Associated Press
MOSCOW -- Russia on Wednesday
offered to restore the discounted gas price it granted Ukraine under the ousted
pro-Russian president, but Ukraine demanded an even better deal and called for
arbitration to settle the dispute.
Speaking in Moscow, Russian
President Vladimir Putin said Russia was offering the discount as a
"partnership deal." Russia's energy minister, Alexander Novak, specified
the price offered as $385 per 1,000 cubic meters of gas.
"We believe that our offer is
more than in a partnership spirit, aimed to support the Ukrainian economy at a
rather difficult time," Putin said in televised remarks. "But if our
offers are rejected it means we will enter another stage. This is not our
choice. We do not want it."
Russia and Ukraine have been locked
for months in a dispute over the price of Russian gas supplies and Ukraine's
debt for previous deliveries. Moscow has threatened to turn off the tap if
Ukraine fails to settle the multibillion-dollar debt, but has repeatedly pushed
back the deadline after Ukraine paid off part of the sum.
European Union-brokered talks
between the two countries in Brussels on Wednesday failed to reach a compromise
over the price.
The bruising gas dispute comes amid
continuing fighting in eastern Ukraine, where government forces have battled
pro-Russian rebels for two months. The insurgents have pushed for joining
Russia following Moscow's annexation of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula in March,
but Putin has ignored their appeal in an apparent bid to avoid another round of
crippling Western sanctions.
Putin also seemed eager to avoid
cutting off gas to Ukraine, a move that would likely disrupt shipments to
European customers via pipelines crossing Ukrainian territory.
He emphasized Wednesday that the
latest offer would restore the price Ukraine had under pro-Russian President
Viktor Yanukovych.
In December, Russia offered Ukraine
an even lower price of $268 as it sought to give a financial lifeline to
Yanukovych, who was facing massive protests triggered by his decision to ditch
a pact with the European Union and opt for closer ties with Moscow.
After Yanukovych was chased from
power in February, Russia denounced his ouster as a "coup" and
annulled all gas discounts, bringing the price back to $485 per 1,000 cubic
meters, in line with a 2009 contract.
Ukraine has refused to pay for
Russian gas, calling the price politically motivated and demanding that Moscow
lower it.
Ukraine's Energy Minister Yuri
Prodan told reporters after the talks in Brussels that the price discount
offered by Russia isn't enough and demanded an even lower price. He said the
Ukrainian government now believes that arbitration is the best option to solve
the dispute.
Prodan, however, added that Ukraine
is open to talks to hammer out a temporary price while arbitration is
proceeding.
Despite the sharp disagreements, EU
Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger, who is involved in the talks, said he
hopes the parties will make progress in the next 48 hours.
"I can see movement on both
sides, and both sides will need to continue to move," he told reporters.
"There are differences of opinion ... and we're talking about
billions."
Oettinger said that he has drawn up
a draft agreement on the EU's behalf that he hopes both Russia and Ukraine can
ultimately agree to, including a temporary "$385 minus" price tag.
He said the final price will depend
on two factors: the volume of Russian gas purchased by Ukraine, and the length
of the agreement, which he has suggested should be 15 months. That would be
enough for Ukraine to see through the winter of 2014-2015 and allow it to build
up its reserves for another winter.
Oettinger said that Putin and
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko are to discuss the issue, but the Kremlin
said there is no immediate plan for such talks.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy
Yatsenyuk earlier Wednesday said that Kiev initially rejected the Russian offer
because there was no guarantee that it would last. Putin and Novak responded by
saying that Russia was ready to guarantee the discounts would remain in place
for one year.
Gazprom, Russia's gas giant, gave
Ukraine a few more days to settle its gas debt before it would start demanding
prepayment for gas, without which it has threatened to cut off supplies.
Gazprom's CEO Alexei Miller said the deadline would be pushed forward to next
Monday.
Georg Zachmann, a research fellow at
Bruegel, a Brussels-based think tank that specializes in economic affairs, said
that despite the impasse, Russia and Ukraine will likely finally come to
agreement.
"There are large sums of money
involved so they are fighting hard for that," Zachmann said. But in the
end, he said, "everybody would lose" from a cutoff of Russian gas to
Ukraine that could also disrupt supplies to the EU.
Dahlburg reported from Brussels.
Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow contributed to this report.
================================================================
10 June 2014
|
Department
of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York
|
States Parties to Convention
on Rights of Persons with
Disabilities
1st & 2nd
Meetings (AM & PM)
Under-Secretary-General Stresses Need to Build Better
Future for All
as States Parties to Disabilities Convention Open
Session
Conference
President Calls for Their Inclusion in Post-2015 Framework
As the
world discussed the post-2015 landscape, it was vital that inclusive
sustainable development built a better future for all people, especially for
those living with disabilities, said Under-Secretary-General Wu Hongbo, as the
Conference of States Parties to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities opened its seventh session today.
“We need
to make sure the new development framework would not leave the 1 billion
persons with disabilities behind,” said the Under-Secretary-General for
Economic and Social Affairs, who spoke on behalf of the Secretary-General.
Opening
the three-day meeting, Conference President Macharia Kamau ( Kenya) highlighted
key achievements, among them that 147 States had ratified the Convention
and that 158 States were signatories. Such triumphs were testament
to the inclusion of the rights of persons with disabilities, as well as the
General Assembly’s high-level meeting on disabilities last September which
determined that addressing disabilities was at the core of development.
Now all
stakeholders must address the gaps between the goals and the situation on the
ground, where access to schools, health care, jobs and public services was
sometimes uneven, he said. Efforts were needed to ensure the inclusion of
persons with disabilities in the post-2015 development goals, to implement the
Convention and to address monitoring and evaluation systems that helped to
identify persons with disabilities. “It was now time for all of us to
roll up our sleeves and work harder on these issues,” he said.
Maria
Soledad, Chairperson of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities, said the exercise of all rights, particularly equal recognition
of persons before the law, was imperative so people could exercise full
autonomy and to make their own decisions on their lives.
Risnawati
Utami, speaking on behalf of civil society, said people with disabilities
should work together to build bridges with partners to ensure the
implementation of the Convention. Given that 80 per cent of those
with disabilities lived in developing countries, their empowerment was vital to
eradicating poverty and achieving sustainable development.
In the
general debate that ensued, a number of speakers described how their countries
were making a difference. Alain Dominique Zoubga, Minister for Social
Action and National Solidarity of Burkina Faso, said since ratifying the
convention in 2009, his country had adopted a national plan, laws and
action-oriented goals. As part of those efforts, a three-year plan to
protect the rights of persons with disabilities included a $5 million
job-creation project.
Many
speakers endorsed the Secretary-General’s statement that persons with
disabilities be included in the post-2015 development agenda.
The
Philippines’ delegate expressed hope that momentum gained at the first-ever
High-Level Meeting on Disability and Development last September would ensure
that the post-2015 development framework would leave no vulnerable groups
behind.
A
representative of the European Union Delegation emphasized the need to enhance
monitoring of the Convention’s implementation, saying that the bloc’s first
implementation report had been sent to the United Nations on 5 June.
Furthermore, 12 European Union States had submitted their reports to the
Organization.
Kenya’s
delegate said that youth were the strength, wealth and drivers of innovation in
her country. That generation would offer the greatest social, political,
intellectual, scientific and technological transformation. Her
Government’s programmes for the disabled had continued to mainstream youth with
disabilities to ensure inclusion in education and economic empowerment.
Speaking
during the general debate were Government ministers from Senegal, New Zealand,
Sudan, Zimbabwe, Angola, Albania, South Africa and Turkey.
Also
delivering statements were representatives of Malta, Philippines, Jordan,
Bangladesh, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Israel, Panama, Cyprus, Sweden, Republic of
Korea, Japan, Russian Federation, France, Italy, Mexico, Australia, Thailand,
Argentina, Indonesia and Canada.
Representatives
of civil society organizations — International Disabilities Alliance, Disabled
People International and the People with Disability of Australia — also spoke.
In other
business, the Conference adopted its agenda, its organization of work and
elected, by two rounds of secret balloting, members of the Committee on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities to replace the nine members whose terms
were due to expire 31 December 2014. The terms of the newly elected
members would begin on 1 January 2015 and end on 31 December 2018.
In the
first round of voting, the following eight candidates were elected:
Theresia Degener ( Germany), Hyung Shik Kim ( Republic of Korea), Stig Langvad
( Denmark), Carlos Alberto Parra Dussan ( Colombia), Coomaravel Pyaneandee (
Mauritius), Jonas Ruskus ( Lithuania), Damjan Tatić ( Serbia) and Liang You (
China).
In the
second round of voting, the Conference elected Danlami Umaru Basharu (
Nigeria).
The
Conference will reconvene Wednesday, 11 June, to continue its general
debate and to hold round tables on incorporating the Convention’s provisions
into the post-2015 development agenda, youth with disabilities and on national
implementation and monitoring.
*
*** *
For information media
• not an official record
10 June 2014
|
Meetings Coverage
PAL/2176
PI/2099
|
|
|
Department
of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York
|
As International Seminar Concludes, Panels Explore
Japan’s Middle East
News Coverage, Use of Visual Tools to Convey Region’s
Reality
TOKYO, 10
June — The twenty-second International Media Seminar on Peace in the Middle
East concluded today, with two interactive panel discussions that explored
Japanese media coverage of events in that region, as well as the use of
innovative visual tools to tell stories conveying the stark realities faced by
Palestinians and Israelis alike.
The
Seminar, which opened on 9 June, was organized by the United Nations Department
of Public Information, in cooperation with Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and Sophia University, Tokyo.
During the
first panel discussion — entitled “Japanese media coverage of the Middle East,
including how the Japanese media covers its Government’s support for Palestine”
— speakers highlighted the country’s decades-long involvement in international
efforts to create the conditions for a durable, lasting peace in the
region. Panellists, several of them Middle East-based journalists,
described the unique perspective that Japanese media brought to the
Israeli-Palestinian situation. Some explored key issues that captured
public attention, while others examined how stories written for the Japanese
public could reach a global audience.
The second
panel discussion — entitled “New tools for the media in covering the Middle
East — Infographics: merging journalism with design” — explored the use
of graphics to communicate complex information quickly and easily. The
four panellists presented colourful maps, charts, images and other interactive
designs to convey the general complexity of daily life as faced by
Palestinians, Israelis and Japanese. They all emphasized the need to use
visual images for communicating serious messages in ways that would garner the
global attention they deserved. The creation of compelling visuals
required intense planning, skill and data mining, they said.
In closing
remarks, Peter Launsky-Tieffenthal, Under-Secretary-General for Communications
and Public Information, said it was not that diplomacy had lost its ability to
find solutions, but rather that it had not been used in ways that would create
the desired outcomes. “Diplomacy only works when you build
relationships,” he emphasized, adding that the last two days had been a stark
reminder of the need to spend more time on building relationships.
Yutaka
Iimura, Special Representative of the Government of Japan for the Middle East
and Europe, said the Seminar had brought together participants involved in
Middle East diplomacy, academia, journalism and the United Nations. “I’m
very glad the Seminar allowed us to have an honest and interactive discussion
on the important role of the media in the Middle East peace process,” he
added. “We should not forget there are millions of people suffering, not
only in Palestine, but in the Middle East.”
Riyad
Mansour, Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine at the United Nations,
said he had held constructive meetings with Japanese officials over the last
two days, and declared: “We would like to see Japan playing a larger
role.” The Seminar was an effort to facilitate a bigger role for the
country in the quest for a peaceful, just resolution of the conflict.
Panel
Discussion 1
Lyutha
Al-Mughairy, Chairperson of the Committee on Information and Permanent
Representative of Oman to the United Nations, moderated the panel, which
featured presentations by Waleed Siam, Representative, Permanent General
Mission of Palestine to Japan; Hiroshi Fuse, Chief Editor, The Arab Magazine,
and Senior Editorial Writer, The Mainichi Newspaper; and Yuki Hasegawa,
Chief, Kofu Bureau, and former Chief, Cairo Bureau, Yomiuri Shimbun.
Mr. SIAM
spoke highly of the Japanese Government’s support for the Palestinian cause,
saying that the main portion of its $1.44 billion commitment was channelled
through bilateral projects with the Palestinian Authority. There were no
cash exchanges as the funds were placed in a Japanese bank and distributed
through Japanese companies to their Palestinian counterparts. Noting that
Japanese media tended to focus more on East Asian and North American affairs,
he said the Middle East was generally not a priority. It was a far-away
region and its complexities were not of special interest to the Japanese
public. A number of factors affected the way in which Japanese media
covered the Middle East, including the Japanese Government’s policy towards the
region, its restrictions on movement and reliance on third-party news
reporting. In addition, Japanese media did not do a good job in
simplifying their presentation to the Japanese public. Japanese people
held a negative perception of the Middle East because of all the news reporting
about terrorist attacks and other violence, particularly after 9/11. The
media must provide deeper coverage of the regional situation and the plight of
Palestinians, he stressed. Although Israel was the biggest hurdle to
completing the Japan-led Peace Corridor project, Japanese media tended to hide
such complications. The press had not covered the Jericho Agro-Industrial
Park either, he noted, stressing: “The media has to be more challengeable
in covering these problems.”
Mr. FUSE,
recalling a visit to the Gaza Strip in 1988, said that Israel had imposed a
curfew hours after his arrival, restricting movement and cutting off phone and
electricity service. That night, a Jewish woman friend had given birth at
a hospital run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine
Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), while her husband, a Palestinian, hid from
Israeli soldiers. He said that the owner of his hotel had explained that
that was daily life in Gaza, adding that after 26 years, he had not forgotten
that story. He went on to recall arriving in Jerusalem with great joy in
1995, having studied the Middle East. During that time, he had attended
several funerals for students killed by terrorist attacks, and in the same
year, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin had been assassinated by a Jewish youth.
In 2002, a cafeteria at Hebrew University had been targeted in a bombing
that had killed seven people and injured 80 others, he said, expressing shock
that the cafeteria was one in which he had loved to spend time while in
Jerusalem. Underlining the paramount importance of dialogue between
Palestinians and Israelis, he said that because Japan had good relations with
both, it could play a larger role in peace efforts.
Ms. HASEGAWA said that, as a reporter, she felt that she was
perceived as “more or less” neutral. “We are less bound up in the notion
that we’re on one side of an issue or another,” she said. Japanese media
did not represent Christians or Muslims, she pointed out. “We represent
our values,” which was perhaps a different perspective, but a common stance of
the Government and media that had served reporters well. She said that in
her visits to Palestine, notably for the funeral of the founder of Hamas, she
had been received with good will by all parties, possibly because she was a
member of Japan’s media, which were sympathetic to the Palestinians suffering
injustice while recognizing at the same time that Israel had legitimate
security concerns. The criticism that Japanese reporting was “cosmetic”
probably meant that Japan was not on one side of an issue or another. “We
try to be more objective,” she said, describing Japan’s media as dedicated,
impartial and devoted. She added that while her newspaper had offices in
Cairo, Jerusalem and Tehran, it lacked outreach, and although her stories were
read by some 20 million people in Japan, the language barrier prevented them
from reaching a global audience.
With the
floor opened for discussion, one participant asked why there had not been more
coverage of the Peace Corridor, while another asked whether the coverage
included an explanation of why such projects were needed. A third
participant wondered how a balance could be struck between the Palestinian and
Israeli sides of the story.
Mr. FUSE,
responding to the question about the Corridor, said that although his newspaper
had been covering that story, it was considered “unglamorous”, and viewers in
Cambodia would say that there must be more coverage of mine removal.
However, events unfolded simultaneously and space was limited. He
recalled that the Japanese Foreign Minister had visited Israel years ago, and
had asked the Government to stop building settlements in order to advance
peace. Israel’s Prime Minister had responded by saying that was a
domestic the issue. The next day, a newspaper editorial had argued that
Japan’s Foreign Minister had interfered in Israel’s domestic affairs, he said,
urging the United Nations to play a bigger role in advancing peace initiatives.
Ms.
HASEGAWA, on striking a balance between Israeli and Palestinian stories,
said: “We should not take sides.” While journalists tried to be
neutral, there was no such thing as perfect neutrality. “We’re not the
ones living the reality so we try to examine things by reporting the
history.” Providing the background of events in the Middle East would
make for a better balance.
Mr. FUSE,
in response to the same query, called for comparing editorials in different
media outlets. He said that if he wrote about Palestine, the implication
was that he was sympathetic to Palestine and he would soon receive calls from
the Israeli embassy asking questions. That was a form of pressure, he
said, emphasizing that to understand the reality of Palestine, it was important
to understand events in the United States.
Panel
Discussion 2
Moderated
by Margaret Novicki, Chief, Communications Campaigns Service, Department of
Public Information, the panel featured presentations by Ramzi Jaber,
Co-Founder, Visualizing Impact and Visualizing Palestine; Roni Levit,
infographic designer; Ahmed Shihab-Eldin, Huffington Post Live; and Takashi
Tokuma, bowlgraphics.
Mr. JABER
said people were “narratively wired”, illustrating the point by recounting the
story of Khader Adnan, a Palestinian administrative detainee who had gone on
hunger strike. A small group of people had created the “Dying to Live”
campaign to attract public attention to the unfolding drama, and the first
major media attention had come from Al Jazeera. Reuters, The New York
Times and CNN had picked up the story after 62 days, and 66 days later, a
court had set Khader Adnan free. He explained that in order to communicate
the story visually, his company had illustrated the physical facts of a hunger
strike, mining data from reputable international and local organizations,
academic institutions and medical journals. It had created other
infographics to illustrate the issue of water in the West Bank, showing the
disparity of water resources and distribution among London, Israel and
Ramallah. Other infographics had visualized the number of babies born at
checkpoints, the routes between Jerusalem and the settlements, and the roads
that Palestinians were not permitted to use.
Ms. LEVIT
noted the similarities between her work and that of Mr. Jaber, but emphasized
that she worked neither in journalism nor politics, but in graphic
design. Creating infographics required researchers, translators, writers
and designers, she said, illustrating her point by presenting a “sound map” of
Jerusalem, in which bright circles of sounds were associated with calls to
prayer at various mosques, orange circles indicated bells at various churches,
blue and red circles showed police and ambulance centres, and grey circles
showed the origin of the Shabat calls. “On the map, you can see how
Jerusalem is divided,” she said, pointing out that the Jewish population was in
the city’s western part and the Muslim population in the east. Standing
in the city centre, one was bombarded by the sounds of different religions, she
said.
Mr.
TOKUMA, discussing interactive infographics, displayed one example in which a
person could understand the costs associated with travelling 1,000
kilometres. Using the illustration of an odometer, a person could see the
increasing amount of money needed. “You can touch it and the figures talk
to you,” he said. “You can feel how much money you’ll need.”
Infographics had been created to attract attention and visualize the concepts
behind numbers, he said, adding that in a “data visualization” example, he had
taken statistics used by researchers of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry. To make the visualization more user-friendly, he said, he had
displayed the numbers as icons showing, at a glance, the number of people
engaged in research and development in various industries. “In the age of
social media, you look at the data and respond,” he said. “Data is available
to anyone.”
Mr.
SHIHAB-ELDIN noted that participants had laughed during the visual
representations of injustice, most likely because of the “ridiculous reality”
being communicated. People did not generally care to read a 1,000-word
article about the six-day Gaza war because it appeared that nothing had
changed. Some stories could not be advanced without an innovative way to
communicate the gravity of the situation, and infographics provided a way to do
that, he said.
Mr. JABER,
responding to a question about what the United Nations should do with
infographic tools when working with Governments that were not susceptible to
the usual pressures of advocacy, said the Organization had a major voice,
noting that although Palestinian voices were usually discredited, they were
covered when the United Nations publicized them.
Mr.
SHIHAB-ELDIN said journalists often “parachuted” into situations and then moved
on. The United Nations could find people who were not traditional
journalists but who were always finding new methods to keep the conversation
alive in ways separate from what was happening on the ground, he added,
stressing the need to “partner with people”.
Closing
Remarks
PETER
LAUNSKY-TIEFFENTHAL, Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public
Information, delivered closing remarks, sharing messages that had provided
“food for thought” over the last two days. Participants had underscored
the importance of coming to the table as equals, and finding different
approaches to diplomacy. The media had a responsibility to call attention
to the peace effort, and Seminar participants, in discussing the “false
balance” in media coverage, had underlined the importance of presenting the
facts as they were. Participants had said that thanks to new media, the
narrative was shifting and the mainstream media could no longer ignore
stories. It was not so much that diplomacy had lost its ability to find
solutions, but rather, that it had not been applied in such a way as to arrive
at the desired outcomes. “Diplomacy only works when you build
relationships,” he added. The last two days had been a stark reminder of
the need to spend more time on building relationships that would give diplomacy
a better chance to work.
YUTAKA
IIMURA, Special Representative of the Government of Japan for the Middle
East and Europe, said the Seminar had brought together participants involved in
Middle East diplomacy, academia, journalism and the United Nations. “I’m
very glad the Seminar allowed us to have an honest and interactive discussion
on the important role of the media in the Middle East peace process.” The
new Palestinian Government had accepted the Quartet principles, which hopefully
would lead both sides to restart direct negotiations. It was meaningful
that the Seminar had been held at such a critical juncture since it allowed for
a better understanding of the challenges involved and of the media’s role in
the peace process. “We should not forget there are millions of people
suffering, not only in Palestine, but in the Middle East,” he said.
RIYAD
MANSOUR, Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine to the United
Nations, said that over the last two days, he had held constructive meetings
with Japanese officials in which they had discussed the relationship between
the two parties to the conflict. They had also discussed the positive
programmes that Japan was carrying out vis-à-vis the question of
Palestine. “We would like to see Japan playing a larger role,” he said,
describing the Seminar as an effort to facilitate a bigger role for Japan in
the quest for a peaceful, just resolution of the conflict. He said that
in the last two days, he had been pleased to interact with young Palestinian
leaders, who were conveying the daily struggle to stay in their homeland in
innovative ways that reached millions of people. “I am proud to say I’m
willing to yield to them to be the future leaders of Palestine,” he declared.
*
*** *
For information media
• not an official record
9 June 2014
|
Meetings Coverage
PAL/2174
PI/2096
|
|
|
Department
of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York
|
United
Nations Counts on Diversity of Media to Shape Perceptions, Secretary-General
Tells International Seminar on Peace in the Middle
East
TOKYO, 9
June — In its work to foster peace in the Middle East, the United Nations
counted on the diverse contributions of traditional and new media, which played
a critical role in promoting transparency and shaping perceptions of the
region’s most important challenges, the head of the United Nations Department
of Public Information said today, as he opened a two-day international media
seminar in Tokyo.
“We look
forward to hearing the many different perspectives and experiences they
represent,” said Peter Launsky-Tieffenthal, Under-Secretary-General for
Communications and Public Information, said in welcoming participants who had
travelled “from near and far” to attend the International Media Seminar on
Peace in the Middle East. The Seminar was taking place amid continuing turmoil
in the Middle East, ongoing tragedy in Syria and a political stalemate between
Israelis and Palestinians in United States-mediated negotiations, which
challenged the prospects for a two-State solution, he said.
Delivering
a message from Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, he pledged that the United
Nations would do all that it could to help a meaningful resumption of the peace
process, and expressed regret that the intense diplomatic efforts of the last
year had not yielded the desired outcome. “There is no contradiction
between Palestinian reconciliation and peace negotiations,” he
emphasized. “Palestinian unity is essential for the viability of any
peace agreement.”
For its
part, he continued, the United Nations had consistently supported efforts towards
unity within the framework of commitments made by the Palestinian Liberation
Organization (PLO), which included recognizing Israel’s right to exist and
renouncing terrorism and violence. The Organization would was committed
to working with the parties and with international partners for an end to the
occupation and the establishment of a Palestinian State living in peace
alongside Israel, within secure and recognized borders.
In other
opening comments, Hirotaka Ishihara, Japan’s Parliamentary Vice-Minister for
Foreign Affairs, said his Government supported a two-State solution, a goal
that could only be achieved through negotiation. Japan welcomed the
formation of a new Palestinian cabinet of technocrats, as well as the
commitment of President Mahmoud Abbas to non-violence, recognition of Israel
and acceptance of previous agreements — the “Quartet principles”.
Also
delivering opening remarks were David M. Malone, Under-Secretary-General and
Rector of the United Nations University, and Takahashi Hayashita, President of
Sophia University.
The
International Media Seminar was established by a 1991 General Assembly
resolution to provide a forum for dialogue between Israeli and Palestinian
journalists, as well as others from the region, with the participation of the
international community. It aims to enhance understanding between peoples
and to achieve a just and lasting peace based on two States living side by side
in peace and security. The Seminar was organized by the Department of
Public Information in cooperation with Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Sophia University.
Opening
Remarks
PETER
LAUNSKY-TIEFFENTHAL, Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public
Information, delivered a message from Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who expressed
regret that intense diplomatic efforts over the last year had not yielded the
desired outcome. Although negotiations had reached an impasse, that did
not mean an end to diplomatic efforts. The Secretary-General had
repeatedly appealed to the parties, as well as the international community to
work constructively to find a meaningful path forward, using the current
“pause” to consider options without taking unilateral steps that would
undermine the prospects for a resumption of direct negotiations. “There
is no contradiction between Palestinian reconciliation and peace negotiations,”
he emphasized. “Palestinian unity is essential for the viability of any
peace agreement.”
For its part, he continued, the United Nations had
consistently supported efforts towards unity within the framework of the
Palestinian Liberation Organization’s commitments, which included recognizing
Israel’s right to exist and renouncing terrorism and violence. In
addition, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in
the Near East (UNRWA) continued to provide assistance and protection to some
5 million registered Palestine refugees. In that context, he
expressed deep concern about the plight of Palestine refugees in Syria, who
were again being displaced by conflict, with dramatic humanitarian
consequences.
He said
the Secretary-General was committed to working with the parties and with
international partners to end the occupation that had begun in 1967, and for
the establishment of a Palestinian State living in peace alongside Israel,
within secure and recognized borders, and for a just, lasting and comprehensive
peace in the Middle East. In that effort, he counted on journalists,
civil society representatives, academics and policymakers, who played a critical
role in promoting transparency and shaping perceptions of the world’s most
important challenges.
HIROTAKA
ISHIHARA, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs, Japan, said
his Government supported a two-State solution whereby Palestine and Israel
would coexist in peace. “This is only achievable through negotiation,” he
emphasized. Japan also welcomed the 2 June formation of a new
cabinet of technocrats, as well as the commitment by President Mahmoud Abbas to
non-violence, recognition of Israel and acceptance of previous agreements – the
“Quartet principles”. Japan’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister had
conveyed strong messages to the Prime Minister of Israel during his visit in
May that the resumption of peace talks would benefit everyone, and that the
parties should refrain from unilateral actions that would undermine the
prospects for peace. Japan had also sent its Special Representative for
the Middle East and Europe to exchange views with President Abbas.
Stressing
the importance of laying the groundwork for a two-State solution, he said Japan
had provided more than $1.44 billion to the Palestinian cause since the
Oslo Accords, and had promoted the “Corridor for Peace and Prosperity”, aimed
at ensuring economic independence and prosperity for Palestine, Israel and
Jordan. Its flagship project, Jericho-Agro Industrial Park, had reached
the stage where a Palestinian company would begin production later this
year. Japan had also established the Conference on Cooperation among East
Asian Countries for Palestinian Development to mobilize their resources and
experiences. Relations between Israel and Palestine and their neighbours
were also important, he said, noting that Egypt’s presidential election marked
a crucial step towards political normalization in that country.
DAVID M.
MALONE, Under-Secretary-General and Rector of United Nations University,
Tokyo, said the United Nations had been only modestly successful — and only at
the margins — in fostering peace in the Middle East. “We have no peace in
the Middle East, despite many, many years of efforts,” either among or within
countries, he pointed out. The region was seriously challenged, and while
United Nations involvement had taken place at various levels, the peace process
was among the most abstract. Regional Governments had had great
difficulty engaging positively on the substance of peace, he said, asking
whether the Middle East was being viewed through “the wrong end of telescope”.
Happy,
inclusive societies generally tended to live in peace with each other within
their neighbourhoods, he explained, encouraging participants to consider how
successful regional societies had been in creating such models for themselves,
rather than focusing exclusively on inter-State relations. Development
was generally considered in terms of economic development, yet social
development was equally important. Japan offered an example of how a
society could be in harmony with itself, he said, adding that the country
enjoyed excellent relations with all significant parties in the Middle East and
had reached out systematically in its international relations.
TAKASHI
HAYASHITA, President of Sophia University, Tokyo, noted that the school
had celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2013, and that 2014 marked the
first time that an institution of higher learning had hosted the United Nations
International Media Seminar. Sophia University was dedicated to
international education and to promoting international understanding, and in
order to deepen that commitment, it had recently established a new faculty of
global studies, which included Middle East studies. Recalling that Pope
Francis had recently visited the Middle East, praying for peace at the
separation barrier, he said Sofia University fully supported his efforts with
the hope that peace would finally descend on the region.
Mr. LAUNSKY-TIEFFENTHAL,
said the Seminar aimed to sensitize public opinion on the question of Palestine
and to examine the evolving media-related dynamics shaping events in the region,
while exploring how they related to the situation between Israelis and
Palestinians. Discussions would focus on the role of the media in recent
events, providing an opportunity for representatives from media, civil society,
policymaking and academia to share their views.
The
Seminar was taking place against the backdrop of continuing turmoil in the
Middle East, he said, noting that the tragedy in Syria had killed more than
100,000 people and internally displaced more than four million. The
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had
estimated that more than 1.8 million Syrian refugees were now in
neighbouring countries, and more than half of the population was in desperate
need.
It had
also been a difficult year in the search for a peaceful solution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he said, with the end of negotiations under the
“Kerry initiative” of United States engagement. As the Secretary-General
had stated, the political stalemate posed great risks to prospects for a
two-State solution. Not making a choice in favour of peace and
coexistence, within the two-State framework, was the most detrimental choice of
all, he said. Failing to continue meaningful negotiations towards the
two-State solution would lead further down the path of a one-State reality on
the ground.
The
Secretary-General continued to stress that settlements in the West Bank and
East Jerusalem were illegal under international law, he continued, also
underlining that demolishing Palestinian households and other property
contravened Israel’s obligation to protect civilians under its
occupation. In addition, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza was a profound
concern, and steps must be taken to improve conditions in the enclave and to
ensure a complete opening of crossings into the area, including Rafah, to allow
for legitimate trade and the movement of people. At the same time,
violence against civilians, including rocket fire from Gaza into Israel, was
equally unacceptable, he emphasized.
Turning to
the Seminar, he said the first panel discussion would focus on whether the
current stalemate signalled the end of the two-State solution and examine the
future of peace efforts. The other four panels would focus on key
media-related dynamics that had emerged in the region over the last year and
how they related to the Israel-Palestine situation in particular.
Panel
Discussion 1
Moderated
by Mr. Launsky-Tiffenthal, the panel discussion titled “Status of Peace Efforts
— What Now?” featured presentations by Phyllis Bennis, Director, New
Internationalism Project, Institute for Policy Studies; Avraham Burg,
International Coordinator, Bruno Kreisky Forum; Yutaka Iimura, Special
Representative, Government of Japan for the Middle East and Europe; and Riyad
Mansour, Permanent Observer, State of Palestine to the United Nations.
Ms. BENNIS
said the best news about the peace process was that the United
States-controlled talks, which represented almost 24 years of failed
diplomacy, had ended. The latest round had offered nothing new, and had
failed because they were based on maintaining Israeli power in the region
rather than ensuring justice, without which there could be no peace. The
United States said that both sides had been unhelpful, Israel by its refusal to
release 29 illegally held prisoners as agreed and its announcement of
700 new illegal settlements, and the Palestinians in having signed
15 human rights treaties. She encouraged participants to compare
Palestinians actions to hold themselves accountable to international law with
Israel’s illegal actions. Looking ahead, different approaches to
diplomacy — rather than diplomacy itself — must be considered, she said,
stressing that, in any scenario, the solution must be based on justice.
The goal of the United States-led process was to eliminate the conflict, and as
long that country was in charge, under political cover provided by the Quartet,
Israeli hegemony would remain the objective. If talks were determined by
the United Nations, the focus would be on international law and implementation
of all United Nations resolutions, including resolution 194 (1948),
which guaranteed refugees’ right to return and to receive compensation. A
change would be seen in the power relationship between the two sides.
While Japan supported Palestinian rights and reconstruction, it had not
challenged the United States-dominated peace process, she said, noting that its
money would be worth more if it were to present “the pause” as an opportunity
for new diplomacy.
Mr. BURG
said he did not wish to repeat criticisms that played the “accusation
game”. Both peoples were victims of a vicious cycle that had found no
solutions. He said he had given up hope that some external magician would
arrive on a white horse and bring redemption to the region. No such
player could do that. What was needed was a change of paradigm, he said,
recalling that the paradigm of partition had prevailed for decades.
“Partition does not work in this neighbourhood,” he said, adding that an alternative
was needed. The United States had proven itself naïve. It was not
an honest broker, and could not be when it provided one side with support and
safety nets. The Europeans were also “in deep mud”, as their soft power
prevented them from fostering a deal. The Arab world had repeatedly
abandoned the Palestinians, while Israel had done whatever it could to exhaust
all potential mistakes before it did the right thing. Despite all the
regional “earthquakes”, the conflict still posed a moral and political challenge
to the West, he warned. In addition, the peace agreements between Israel
and its neighbours were solid. Oslo provided the framework for the
Palestinian Authority’s artificial existence, but it appeared that the
“post-Tunis” generation of Palestinians preferred the most challenging approach
to Israeli occupation: civil, non-violent disobedience, for which Israel
had no energy or answer. The despair over the two-State solution
indicated a need to transform the discourse from one of power to one of rights
and liberties encompassing an alternative to partition. He said he was
unsure of Israel’s acceptance of such a change. In politics, the burden
of change was the responsibility of the weak element, because the strong
element had no motivation, he pointed out. The key was in the Palestinian
hands.
Mr. IIMURA
said that, while the peace process was at a critical juncture, it had not
ended. It was critically important that the international community
firmly maintain the idea of a two-State solution as the only way to solve the
problem, and urge the parties to resume direct negotiations. For its
part, Japan had strongly encouraged both sides to resume the talks and refrain
from unilateral actions that would have a negative effect on the situation.
It had called on Israel to freeze settlement activity, which contravened
international law, and cautioned the Palestinian side against actions that
would provoke Israel. On the economic front, efforts should be stepped up
to prepare the future State of Palestine for self-sustainability. Japan’s
“Corridor for Peace and Prosperity” initiative, launched with Israel, Jordan
and Palestine, aimed to create a vigorous private sector through the Jericho
Agro-Industrial Park. It aimed to create 7,000 jobs and generate
$41.6 million annually. The Conference on Cooperation among East
Asian Countries for Palestinian Development aimed to harness the resources of
those countries towards economic growth.
Mr. MANSOUR
said it was true that Palestinians saw themselves as victims in the
relationship, and that they would show the way towards resolving the
conflict. Israel would not help to change the status quo. “It is
our responsibility that we will carry the torch and show the path for how we
can bring justice to this conflict” for the benefit of both sides. “Our
State exists, but our land is under occupation,” he said. The Palestinian
negotiating team had thought that the aim of the negotiations was to end the
occupation and realize a two-State solution. However, Israel’s negotiation
team had not prepared its people for an eventual withdrawal from Palestinian
land. Had it been interested in peace, it would not have increased
settlement activity by 123 per cent over the previous year,
demolished homes and tried in the Knesset to pass laws extending Israeli
sovereignty over Muslim holy sites, he pointed out. It was for such
reasons that the negotiations had not succeeded, adding that Israel would not
change its behaviour unless it had an incentive to do so. He called for
exacting a heavier cost for Israel’s settlement activities, noting that the
Europeans had opened the door with their funding guidelines, which must be
strengthened and enlarged. In addition, Governments must treat as
criminals activist settlers who committed crimes against Palestinian civilians.
The floor
was then opened for discussion, with participants asking about some of the
points raised by panellists.
Mr. BURG,
responding, said that changing the oppressor’s behaviour was a huge question
that pointed to the psyche of the Israeli occupier. The abused had become
the abuser, and discovering the reason why would help to answer the
question. Israel responded well to disasters, he said, adding that he did
not know which disaster would unleash Israeli justice. One street in
Hebron epitomized the occupation, he said — one side was well paved for Jews,
and the other was in terrible condition and meant only for Palestinians.
Oslo had introduced partition, and for 20 years, generations of children
had not known anything about the other side.
Ms. BENNIS
voiced concern that Israel was occupying another people’s land, denying
refugees their right to return and treating a segment of its own population as
fifth-class citizens. A lesson could be learned from South Africa’s
anti-apartheid movement, she said, noting that the reason Israelis accepted the
status quo was because the price was sustainable. What had “pushed the
buttons” in South Africa was the sports boycott against the Springboks playing
in the World Cup. Israelis would pay attention when the cultural and
academic boycott started to bite, she warned, adding that the United Nations
must end its obsession with being even-handed.
Mr. MANSOUR,
responding to a question about the one fifth of Israel’s population living
below the poverty line, said funds must be cut from “the settlement enterprise”
and the defence industry in order to help them. As for increasing the
costs of occupation, the conditions must be allowed to ripen, since making a
decision in an abstract way would not elicit the desired response. “You
need to create a situation where people will do it spontaneously”, as had
happened in the First Intifada, he said, adding that he had seen a greater
international readiness for Palestinians to take “bolder” steps.
Governments
could hold criminal activists accountable and international companies could
refrain from expanding in the occupied territories, he said. Under the
Oslo Accords, Palestinians had no jurisdiction over crimes committed by Israeli
settlers or soldiers on their territory, but were required to document and hand
them over to Israel. Palestinians had documented all the crimes committed
since the Second Intifada and would send copies to the occupying authority, to
the United Nations and the media, in readiness for the moment of
“complementarity” with the International Criminal Court.
Mr. BURG
added that boycotts were not helpful because 90 per cent of those who
would be harmed wanted peace. Boycotts would drive neoconservative “Tea
Party Republicans” to successfully lobby Congress for compensation.
Turning to psychological elements, he said there was a competition of
traumas. People did not understand the continuing role of Holocaust in
Israeli decision-making. “This is the competition,” he stressed.
“If you don’t undo competition and create a situation in which Israel realizes
its responsibility for the refugee problem, the issues will persist.”
Another
participant commented that the situation in Syria had arisen from the absence
of a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and urged the international
community to take seriously its responsibility to resolve it.
Panel
Discussion 2
Deborah
Seward, Director, Strategic Communications Division, Department of Information,
moderated the second panel discussion, on “Shifting narratives in media
coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Middle East peace
efforts”. Making presentations were Nobuhisa Degawa, Senior Commentator,
Japan Broadcasting Corporation; Nour Odeh, Founder and CEO, Connect Strategic
Communications Consultancy; Noam Sheizaf, +972 Magazine; and Ahmed
Shihab-Eldin, Huffington Post Live.
Mr. DEGAWA
recalled that, 20 years ago, he had been dispatched to open the first
Japan Broadcasting Corporation news bureau in Jerusalem, at a time when he had
had high expectations about the future. The Oslo Agreement had been
reached the year before, he said, adding that he had expected to be in
Jerusalem for four years, that Israel and Palestine would reach a final status
agreement and that he would cover the signing ceremony. Today, “I am not
excited” about those prospects, he said, recalling that he had interviewed
President Abbas two years ago during his visit to Japan, as well as the Prime
Minister of Israeli, who had sought to avoid questions about resuming peace
talks and to discuss Iran’s nuclear programme instead. There were forces
opposed to peace on both sides, while others objected to “giving in” to the
peace process. Under the Oslo Accords, no neutral mediator had been designated,
and while the United States was important, it was not necessarily fair and
neutral. Israel had power over the Palestinians, and Oslo did not outline
ways in which to end settlement activity nor allow room for a partial
agreement. If the promoters of peace were not in the majority on both
sides, the peace process would not succeed, he emphasized. People were
losing interest in Middle East issues, perhaps in part because there had been
no progress. The media had a responsibility to draw attention to the
peace process.
Ms. ODEH
called attention to the “false balance” in the media coverage of the Middle
East, saying it tried to categorize the story into a “he said, she said” model
that gave equal significance to both sides. That was simply not the
reality. Expressing frustration with the “fake balance” dictated by
editorial boards, she said that telling the story was not about making people
happy, but about presenting the facts. The Middle East conflict was not
about a real estate dispute, or two Governments at war because they liked it;
it was about a people under an occupation covering everything from the goods
they consumed to the time they took to travel from one Palestinian location to
another. However, the media approach was shifting, thanks to social media
and the emergence of “citizen journalism”, she noted. People around the
world now had better opportunities to hear voices that did not have to pass
through editorial filters. But the mainstream media remained immune to
the shift, she said, citing the recent story of two Palestinian boys killed by
Israeli soldiers. Despite the shooting having been broadcast around the
world, a Middle East analyst had answered, when asked about the boys, that it
was not known if they were, in fact, dead. Casting doubt on factual
events illustrated the influence of such narratives, she said, stressing that
non-mainstream media must be encouraged to shift the narrative.
Mr. SHEIZAF
said he had recently received a call from a journalist seeking help on a story
about Israeli society. Previously based in Ramallah and recently
relocated to Beirut nearing the end of the peace talks, he had been told that
there was nothing to report. The story that the mainstream media demanded
no longer existed. “We’re dealing with a transformative moment in the way
we shape narratives,” he said. Noting that his magazine had existed for
four years, he said it had received 8 million visits,
80 per cent of them mainly from the United States and Canada, but no
one read the diplomacy or political system stories. The most widely read
story had been an info-graphic about the freedom of movement, which looked at
the routes that an Israeli and a Palestinian had to travel to reach the
beach. Another was an exchange of Facebook messages between Israelis and
Iranians at the height of tensions between their two countries. None of
the stories contained the words “Netanyahu”, “Abbas” or “United Nations”.
They were predominantly human rights stories that touched on activism.
They lacked the overall context one would see in a formal conversation between
a traditional anchor and commentator. “The new narrative has abandoned
diplomacy to a greater extent than any one of us can imagine,” he said, adding
that it bordered on hostility to diplomacy. The Palestinians he had met
were not interested in a Palestinian State, and the Israelis were not
interested in diplomacy. Today, the fragmented consumption of journalism
fit the human rights narrative emerging from the ground. Israel did not
have a good answer for why people had been deprived of their freedom of due
process and travel, and no political actor had reacted in a good way to such
challenges.
Mr. SHIHAB-ELDIN
said he had been called an anti-Semite, a Hamas sympathizer and a mouthpiece for
terrorists long before he had started working for the Huffington Post.
The story in the Middle East was about justice, yet the framing of the conflict
had been missing, in part, because of lobbying, censorship and
self-censorship. Old narratives had allowed Israel to progress with
impunity because the media war had long been disproportionate. However,
the old rhetoric had lost its relevance, he said, citing the Israeli Prime
Minister’s comments to the effect that peace was only possible with a divided
Palestinian Government. With those words, he was trying to frame the
Palestinian reconciliation as “yes to terrorism and no to peace”, which was
overly simplistic. Media was a competitive business, and the mainstream
media could no longer ignore stories from people on the ground who had
exclusives “because they were there”. The narrative was starting to shift
in favour of justice.
When the
floor was opened for discussion, participants asked about subjects ranging from
how to foster peace, to ownership of media content, to the shared lineage of
Israelis and Palestinians.
Ms. ODEH,
noting that the Pope was informed about Palestine, the injustices they suffered
and the impact of the wall on Palestinian Christians, said that, by making
decisions at an individual level, people could help end injustice.
Mr. SHEIZAF,
discussing content ownership, said that Israel spent a lot on propaganda, in
part because it was losing its grip on the conversation. The Israeli
Defense Forces spokesperson operated on Facebook and Twitter, and was called an
“information combatant”, he noted. “This is a lost battle because the
[Israeli Defense Forces] is conducting the same war as Coca-Cola and you can’t
win the Twitter war under a brand,” he said. “We’re entering an age of populism
in politics, where there is a greater sense among politicians that they must
respond quickly on social media.”
Mr. SHIHAB-ELDIN
said the fact that it was more difficult for anyone to control the narrative
was encouraging because that provided greater opportunities for expanding the
narrative.
Mr. DEGAWA,
in response to a question about Israeli and Palestinian lineage, said that, for
the Japanese, nationality was a matter of course, while Palestinians had not
had a nation for a long time. Israelis had established their
nation. To understand the history, “you have to be there”, he said,
adding that that would help one to understand the difficulty of forging
peace. A one-State solution was not possible, and a two-State solution
was the only viable option.
Mr. SHIHAB-ELDIN
said the question spoke to the lack of interaction between the two sides.
If the figurative or physical walls came down, that would facilitate a better
future for Israelis and Palestinians.
Ms. ODEH
emphasized that the conflict was not about what had happened 3,000 years
ago. To draw the map in that way would make the entire world look very
different, and many countries would not exist. Palestinians and Israelis
of Middle Eastern heritage might have shared a grandfather or grandmother, she
said, but the situation was not so much about lineage as political and national
rights. “We talk about peace as if it was a present to buy at a
supermarket.” It was not, and that was not the answer to the conflict.
Panel
Discussion 3
Moderating
the third panel discussion, titled “Coverage and narratives surrounding
Palestinian refugees — turning the spotlight on Yarmouk” was Chris Gunness,
Spokesperson, UNRWA. The panel featured presentations by Faisal Irshaid,
BBC World; Nidal Bitari, Palestinian Association for Human Rights in Syria;
Phyllis Bennis, Director, New Internationalism Project, Institute for Policy
Studies; and Ryoji Tateyama, Visiting Fellow, Institute of Energy Economics,
Professor Emeritus, National Defence Academy, Japan.
Mr. GUNNESS,
introducing the panel, described the successful UNRWA global social media
“thunder clap” campaign in support of Palestinians in Syria, in particular, the
Yarmouk refugee camp.
Mr. IRSHAID
said that to understand the situation in Yarmouk, one must look at the Syrian
conflict from its start in March 2011. At that time, BBC had
expected the uprising to mirror what had taken place in Tunisia and
Egypt. Instead, the Government had responded with an “iron fist”,
shifting the situation from peaceful demonstration to armed conflict. In
December 2012, BBC had received reports from field commanders that the
regime would fall by the summer of 2013, and as such, had focused on ground
developments rather than humanitarian issues. “We were absolutely wrong,”
he said, noting that, by June 2013, the regime had shown that it was
strong and “here to stay”. In January 2013, the United Nations had
estimated that 1 million people needed immediate humanitarian aid.
By January 2014, that number had grown to 10 million, which was why
BBC had sought to spotlight the humanitarian situation. At the end of
2013, there had been few foreign journalists in Syria, and the best source of
information was “user-generated content”, or citizen journalism. Online communities
had formed to tell the world what was happening. BBC had to verify social
media information, sometimes three times, because there was strong propaganda
by both the opposition and the Government, as well as many false leads and
misinformation.
Ms. BENNIS
explained, by way of background, that the reason why Palestinian refugees
remained in Damascus and elsewhere in the region, six decades after 1948, dated
back to al-Nakba (the “catastrophe”), when 750,000 Palestinians had been
expelled from their homes at gunpoint, or had fled for fear of fighting during
Israel’s creation. They remained refugees today, many in camps inside
Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. There were now more than 4.5 million of
them around the world, and many of those in Yarmouk were refugees for the fifth
time, having moved in 1948, 1967, 1970 and 1982 amid changing political and
military realities.
Mr. BITARI
shared his experience as a refugee in Syria, saying that, at the start of the
conflict, people had thought it was in their best interest to remain
neutral. Palestinians in Syria had enjoyed privileged economic and social
rights — the same as Syrians — and more than those of Palestinians in
Lebanon and elsewhere. As activists inside Yarmouk and other Syrian
camps, they had tried not to give the impression that they were pro-regime and
against the opposition — or vice versa. “We don’t want to be used by
either the regime or the opposition.” However, the situation had changed
in July 2013, when the regime had bombed Yarmouk and the Free Syrian Army
had entered the camp the next day.
Mr. GUNNESS
added that Syria had historically been extremely generous to Palestinian
refugees, more so than most Governments might be to a huge foreign
population. Different narratives had emerged, one stressing that various
events had been inflicted on the camp and the other stressing that foreign
terrorists had entered the country and the Government was trying to defend
itself. How could those account be reconciled?
Mr. IRSHAID
said the two narratives were advertised for different regional audiences, and
it was difficult for a news organization to verify information without staff on
the ground.
Mr. BITARI
added that there was a strong civil society presence inside the camps.
People were prepared to communicate with the media, whether Arabic or
international.
Ms. BENNIS
said that discourse followed reality. There were at least six wars being
fought in Syria, and as long as they continued, there would be no marrying of
narratives. The priority was to end the war and rebuild social
cohesion. It was not enough to change the discourse on the ground, and
Governments around the world must do more to stop the violence.
Mr. TATEYAMA,
asked about lessons learned from international intervention in Yarmouk, touched
on the situation in the Shatila, Burj Barajneh and Rashidiyeh camps in
Lebanon. He said he had been sent to southern Lebanon in the 1980s to
help Palestinian and other refugees living near the camps. In the early
1970s, Palestinian armed groups had launched attacks across the border with
Israel, and in 1982, the Lebanon war erupted, with the Israeli invasion aiming
to eliminate the PLO political and military infrastructure. It had also
been aimed at establishing a pro-Israeli Government in Beirut, but that plan
had not been realized. Palestinian fighters, including former PLO leader
Yasser Arafat, had been forced to leave Lebanon, and the Israeli occupation had
continued for three years, before its forces had eventually withdrawn from
southern Lebanon. As for suggestions that local solutions could set an
example for peacemakers, he said the humanitarian crisis should not be tackled
solely from the top down. Local organizations and humanitarian agencies
also had an important role to play.
Mr. BITARI,
addressing that point, said the context of the Lebanese civil war was very
different from what was happening in Syria today. People fleeing the
camps were not allowed to leave Syria, and Lebanon had closed its
borders. Jordan had refused, since the start of Syrian revolution, to
receive refugees, while Turkey now demanded visas. Many who had fled had
been arrested because their travel documents were not recognized by the
destination countries, and their only solution was to return to Palestine.
Mr. IRSHAID
agreed in principle that the problem would be solved when Palestinians could
return home. However, the Russian Federation had also used its veto power
in the Security Council, he said, stressing that international players must
resolve their own problems before the Palestinian situation could be
resolved. People were staying in Yarmouk to protect their right of
return.
When the
floor was opened for discussion, one participant said that suggestions that
UNRWA did not have a protection mandate was “slightly wrong” in that the
General Assembly had passed a resolution adding one. Another participant
took issue with the “sterile” conversation about Yarmouk and the situation in
Syria, saying that what was missing in Middle East context was discussion of
the international community’s failure to hold international players and
countries accountable.
Mr. GUNNESS
replied that UNRWA had a specific mandate. If it accused anyone of a
crime against humanity, Palestinian refugees would not receive the one food
packet that allowed them to survive. The Agency was currently delivering
humanitarian aid to 18,000 people in Yarmouk. There were parts of
the United Nations whose legitimate role it was to make judgements on the basis
of international law, as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
had done in her recent support of the rights under discussion today. With
confusion over mandates, the only people who suffered were the beneficiaries.
Mr. IRSHAID
said Palestinians were being punished for things they had not done. They
had committed no crimes. He was not a politician. As a BBC
journalist, he sought to ensure that the real story was being told. “We
got a lot of wrong information from people trying to push propaganda,” he said,
which forced him to ensure that he had the right information. He had not
turned a blind eye to human suffering.
Mr. BITARI,
to comments about a sterile conversation about Yarmouk, said he had taken
18 days to prepare his comments about each incident that had taken place
at Yarmouk. T he road to human rights respect was long. For sixty years,
Palestinians had waited for human rights laws to be implemented. He was
here today because the people of Yarmouk were demanding the United Nations to
save their lives.
Another
participant from the Syrian Government thanked UNRWA for its work to satisfy
Palestinians’ concerns. The problem was with those countries that did not
fund UNRWA. She did not expect anyone to question the Syrian Government’s
support for Palestinians. All Syrians were suffering. She urged
thinking about ways to solve the crisis and to stop the support for the foreign
terrorist groups inside Syria. She held up a note verbale by the
Palestinian Authority, which thanked the Syrian Government for its support for people
in Yarmouk.
Mr. IRSHAID
pointed out that the current discussion was an example of two narratives to the
conflict. It was up to people to decide what was actually
happening. Journalists needed to report facts.
Mr. BITARI
said that the international community had neglected the situation in
Syria. The people in Yarmouk wanted to open the door for peace and
maintain their right to live.
Ms. BENNIS
rounded out the discussion by saying that the question hinged on stopping the
war. The people of Japan could pressure their Government and demand that
it take a strong position at the United Nations, calling for an immediate
ceasefire to all the wars inside Syria and for an arms embargo on all sides
involved.
*
*** *
For information media
• not an official record
8 October 2013
|
General Assembly
GA/11439
|
|
|
Department
of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York
|
Sixty-eighth General Assembly
Plenary
31st Meeting (AM & PM)
Channel Funds to Development, General Assembly Urged
As High-Level Dialogue on Financing Concludes
Round-table
Discussions Held during Two-day Event at Headquarters
A broad
range of stakeholders’ commitments, criticisms and concerns had built momentum
towards redoubling efforts in achieving the Millennium Development Goals and
towards advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015, said
General Assembly Vice-President Octavio Errázuriz today at the close of the
High-level Dialogue on Financing for Development.
Over the
two-day event, representatives of Member States, civil society and the private
sector delivered statements and participated in round tables and an informal
interactive dialogue that examined elements of how to effectively channel
funding to promote and bolster development. (See Press Release GA/11438)
Delivering
a statement on behalf of John Ashe ( Antigua and Barbuda), President of the
General Assembly, Mr. Errázuriz thanked the participants for their
valuable contributions and constructive interventions. Outlining the key
points raised through the Dialogue, he noted that a changing world required an
adapted conceptual framework to deal with new circumstances and challenges,
particularly those related to the integration of the social, economic and
environmental dimensions of sustainable development.
He also
noted calls for an early conclusion to the World Trade Organization Doha Round
of trade negotiations and for countries to fulfil their official development
assistance (ODA) commitments to bolster development. He said many
delegations also called for the Follow-up International Conference on Financing
for Development to be held before the end of 2015 in order to best contribute
to the post-2015 agenda.
“I have
also sensed optimism that we can come together to meet the challenges of
sustainable development,” he said. “The resources are there, they just
need to be allocated effectively. This requires a true multi-stakeholder
effort and global partnership encompassing all stakeholders, in order to
expedite the mobilization of financial resources, public and private, at the
national, regional and international levels, for sustainable development.”
The
General Assembly will meet at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 9 October, to
take up a report of its Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) and
other matters to be announced.
Round
Table II
Jeremiah
Nyamane Kingsley Mamabolo, Permanent Representative of South Africa, chaired
the round table on “Mobilization of public and private financing, including
foreign direct investment and other private flows, and fostering international
trade and sustainable debt financing, in the context of financing for
development”. It featured the following panellists: Mansur Muhtar,
Co-Chair, Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development
Financing, and Executive Director, World Bank Group; Shamshad Akhtar, Assistant
Secretary-General for Economic Development; Erik Berglöf, Chief Economist and
Special Adviser to the President of the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development; Renate Hahlen, Head of Unit, Aid and Development Effectiveness and
Financing, Directorate General for Development and Cooperation, EuropeAid,
European Commission, Brussels; and, Bruce Greenwald and Robert Heilbrunn,
Professors of Finance and Asset Management, Columbia Business School.
Mr. MAMABOLO
said evidence suggested that financing needs for the economic, social and
environmental dimensions of sustainable development were high and that
estimated financing needs represented a global savings of around
$17 trillion in 2012. The challenge rested in facilitating a
financial system that directed a portion of that investment toward sustainable
development. As financing needs for sustainable development far outpaced
public sector resources, the focus must be on both private sources and public
resources, domestically and internationally. The public sector had an
important role to play in incentivizing private investment into areas of global
concern. Institutional investors had been increasingly looked at as a
potential source for long-term financing for sustainable development, yet
investments had been limited due to a range of factors, including weak
regulatory structures. Foreign direct investment flows had also been
falling globally. Domestic resource mobilization was critical and should
be driven by inclusive and sustained economic growth. An important
question he asked was how developing countries could raise their capacity to collect
public revenues. Current concerns include illicit financial flows, the
potential of international trade as a source of financing development and
sovereign debt.
Mr. MUHTAR
said in view of the change in the development landscape and the global financial
outlook, it was clear traditional ODA was coming under increased pressure, ever
burdened by the economic crisis. Other sources, including from the
private sector and philanthropists, were now being directed towards
development. While it was important to recognize the weight of public
resources, other sources needed to be leveraged. The World Bank had been
examining how to do so through existing and new channels. More could be
done to benefit from the private sector’s potential, however, there were
risks. The challenge was creating a conductive condition to tap into
those resources, he said. To do so, domestic conditions needed to be
improved in many countries to make them attractive for investors. Among
the tasks at hand were mobilizing tax revenues, generating natural resource
revenues and addressing illicit finance flows. In addition, subsidies
amounting to $400 billion were not reaching the intended beneficiaries and
those funds could be tapped for development.
Ms. AKHTAR
said that due to challenges, the financing framework for sustainable
development had to be broad-based. She stated that some lessons learned
over the past few years were instructive. The global financial crisis had
resulted in major destruction to financial systems. This reality called
for maintaining financial stability at both the international and domestic
level. Also, the current financial sector could not adequately meet the
needs of developing countries, particularly in providing long-term funding, she
said, stressing the need for a stronger, more resilient and diversified
financial sector. She pointed out that the lack of financial access in
developing countries should be addressed and that efficiency in financial
resources allocation should be enhanced. On mobilization of domestic
resources, there was a huge gap between developing countries and developed
countries in terms of public revenue collection. Developing countries
needed to expand their tax base and combat tax evasion, tax avoidance and
illicit financial flows. In that regard, strengthening international
cooperation was crucial. On ODA, she said although the global crisis had
affected developed countries’ economic growth, they could still try to fulfil
their commitments by improving resources allocation and looking for new funding
sources.
Mr. BERGLÖF
said the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development experience
demonstrated how financing could help to deliver on the Millennium Development
Goals and the post-2015 development agenda. Finance transformed economies
and the lives of people, with access to it being an important delivery
mechanism for sustainable and inclusive growth. Foreign direct
investment, private equity funds and emerging market corporate funds were also
important transformational financing tools. Looking beyond, the post-2015
agenda should aim at extending the Millennium Goals to neglected areas and to
broader themes, such as climate change. The critical role of the private
sector should be recognized and there should be a broader role for multilateral
development banks. In the Bank’s work helping transition countries to
catch up through transformational financing, lessons learned included that
productivity growth was linked to reform. Multilateral development bank
activities included the use of banks to deliver Millennium Development
Goal-type objectives by providing credit lines to finance energy efficiency,
subsidies that maximized impact to target CO2 savings and efforts to promote
women entrepreneurs, food security or water and material efficiency. But
multilateral development banks could not do it alone and a coordinated approach
was needed. For its part, the Bank’s key strategic objectives included
mobilizing long-term investment while complying with United Nations Principles
for Responsible Investment.
Ms. HAHLEN
said that each country should take the primary responsibility for its own
development. Speaking of domestic public resources for financing for
development, she said developing countries needed to improve their tax systems,
strengthen tax administration, combat tax avoidance, fight corruption and
ensure accountability. Stressing the role of private finance, which was
larger than all public finance combined, she said Governments should adopt
appropriate policies to create an enabling environment and channel investment
into sustainable development. Although the private sector was
profit-driven, given the large amount of funds it had, even a small portion of
that would make a significant contribution to development. Acknowledging
that ODA remained a major financing source for low-income countries, she said
European Union Member States would continue to deliver on their
commitments. Meanwhile, reforming the ODA mechanism and better monitoring
of the funding for different policy objectives were needed. Financing
must be aligned with policy objectives and should go where it was most needed,
she said, stressing the need for using development funds in an effective way to
ensure maximum results. Looking to the future, she said sustainable
development would require a comprehensive approach.
Mr. GREENWALD
said a century ago peripheral economies were based on agriculture, but today
this was no longer the case due to important productivity growth levels.
Manufacturing dominated the twentieth century, but was now dying the same death
for the same reasons as agriculture. Recently, manufacturing was in fact
returning to the developed world, with lower transportation costs, higher
employment costs and fewer jobs. Given the challenges facing the next
generation of developing economies, development goals that are set must
recognize that technology diffusion was key. Peripheral economies would
face many serious challenges, which emphasized the sense of urgency in addressing
those concerns in this and other fora. Resources should not be wasted on
middle-income countries, and the focus should be on the poorest
countries. Since economies would no longer be able develop through
agricultural, global funding sources would be the likely driver of development
into the future. Local infrastructure was imperative, including banking
systems and national institutions capable of addressing concerns.
Countries reeling from the death of manufacturing often now tried to export
their way out of the situation, which was not a viable long-term
solution. One way out, he said, could be if the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) or similar local institutions issued special drawing rights, which
would have a profound effect on developing countries by relieving the current
structural pressure that, historically, resembled the realities of the Great
Depression.
The
representative of Saudi Arabia recalled that developed countries had
committed to the 0.7 per cent of gross national product target regarding
ODA. His country had reached this target, but many other countries lagged
behind, he said. Now in discussing the post-2015 global agenda, there was
the question whether this target was too high, too low or just about
right. He believed that with so many people around the world suffering
from poverty, hunger and the lack of energy and social services, if Member
States could not agree on a higher target, at least they should deliver on
their commitments by 2015. He also stressed that trade was more important
for development than aid, calling for assisting developing countries in
increasing market access and manufacturing more exportable products.
While acknowledging that the private sector was essentially profit driven, he
said it remained an important source and even a small portion of private
funding could contribute significantly to development.
The
representative of the United Republic of Tanzania raised the question of
implementation. He said many speakers had talked about developing
countries taking ownership for their own development, which was exactly what
many African countries had been doing. They had made efforts to
strengthen institutions, good governance, the rule of law, partnerships between
the public and private sectors and tailored policies to attract foreign direct
investment. Many commitments had been made on various international
platforms, including in the Monterrey Consensus and Doha Declaration, he said,
but they were not implemented. If all commitments had been fulfilled, the
Millennium Goals could have been reached. Therefore, he called on all
Member States to make sure that commitments would be implemented.
The
representative of the United Arab Emirates said that over the last two
years, the country’s ODA had increased dramatically, calling for developed
countries to reach the 0.7 per cent gross national product target
regarding ODA. Regarding the post-2015 agenda, he raised the question on
how to incorporate measures of encouraging private investment and ODA into the
agenda.
A civil
society representative brought up the role of women in economic development,
noting that the Beijing Platform for Action principles had been sidestepped by
the Monterrey and Doha processes. There would be no sustainable
development without gender equality and women’s rights, she said, emphasizing
that it was imperative that fiscal policies were in line with human rights and
considered social protection measures, since women played a large part of
informal labour sector. New mechanisms for financing for development were
needed honouring justice for all and existing commitments to gender equality
and women’s rights needed to be fulfilled. Public and private sectors
needed gender objectives that were accountable.
The
representative of the Republic of Korea said many elements contributed
to his country’s economic development and it would share experiences and best
practices. The Republic of Korea was collaborating with the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to provide a model for development and
methodology to benefit interested countries. Regarding the European Bank
for Reconstruction and Development, he asked for more details on the impact of
smart subsidies.
Australia’s representative said trade was a driver of
development. Liberalization of trade enhanced growth and trade-led growth
allowed countries to build and use additional forms of financing for
development. Least developed countries account for only
1 per cent of global trade and a successful Doha Round in Bali would
deliver a needed boost to increase that percentage.
The
representative of Saint Kitts and Nevis, speaking on behalf of the
Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said development banks had been involved in
bolstering economic activity at the local level, however, enhancing the
expertise at this level would be an area to investigate. Given the
importance of trade, the CARICOM Single Market and Economy was increasing
regional activities. Regarding Mr. Greenwald’s statement of not
wasting time with middle-income countries, he asked the panellist for advice
for middle-income countries, which formed a large number of CARICOM States.
Germany’s representative said the Monterrey Consensus supported
strengthening tax systems. The G20 Summit addressed illegal capital flows
through transparency measures. Other venues had addressed related
issues. A dialogue was now required on the various systems, particularly
concerning the BRIC countries ( Brazil, Russian Federation, India and China),
to further expand on existing themes.
The
representative of Barbados said that the ongoing global economic and
financial crisis had significantly affected the development cooperation
landscape. Under this background, his country had proposed a variety of
initiatives in financing for development, including the establishment of an
international fund aimed at providing investment on small and medium
enterprises, particularly in such fields as agricultural development and
technological innovation. While admitting that each country should take the
primary responsibility for development, he said that Barbados — a country with
a small, vulnerable economy — could not do this alone and that its efforts
needed to be supplemented by international assistance. He called for
using indicators other than gross domestic product (GDP) per capita to measure
the degree of development, saying that his country was classified in the
middle-income group, a designation that lead to decreased international
assistance.
A
representative from the business sector said that a significant portion of ODA
had not been achieving the expected effectiveness it should have been, and the
fact that some multilateral development agencies had instead resorted to giving
direct cash transfers to those most in need was an indicator of that. He
called for a paradigm shift in the way ODA was administered so as to achieve
its intended results. He also said that given increasing awareness of
corporate social responsibility and the profit-making potential in a green
economy, with appropriate leverage and incentives, it was possible to channel
private investment to support sustainable development.
The
representative of Argentina said ODA remained an important source of
financing for developing countries, adding that financing from the private
sector was complementary but could not replace ODA. She also stressed the
need for mobilizing domestic sources, addressing sovereign debt crisis,
promoting trade and eliminating agricultural subsidies in developed countries.
The
representative of Bangladesh said most countries that pledged their
commitment at a Special Event on the Millennium Goals last month had not
fulfilled their promises. While non-traditional funding sources were
important, they could not replace steady sources of funding, he said. The
onus was on the Member States to ensure there was smooth and sustainable
financing for development.
A speaker
from the business sector said there were adequate funding sources, but the
process was flawed. Banks were not taking enough risks, she said, noting
there was evidence of certain pockets of unpopular fields that received scant
funding. She suggested strengthening local institutions and measures to
unlock some risks not addressed by traditional instruments currently being
used.
A
representative of civil society said he was puzzled over the way countries
bailed out banks instead of building toward development. Regulation was
needed in the global financial architecture to prevent future crises. An
independent institution, not IMF, should handle efforts to address pressing
problems. He was surprised that private finance was on the international
agenda when European experiences showed private credit-driven booms ended in
busts. A clear selection process was needed when taking that
approach. Capital controls and binding standards were needed for
Governments and private institutions. Private actors should pay taxes in
a way the represents tax justice. He called on the United Nations to
convene an international forum on tax issues.
Ecuador’s representative noted that what functioned for some
countries did not for others. New institutional agreements were needed
alongside a new format of what investment should be. A private sector
country had used and abused his country, and other countries faced similar
situations. New agreements would maximize profitability and development.
Responding
to questions from the delegates, Mr. Greenwald said he did not think
supporting middle-income countries was a “waste of time” but in a world of
limited resources in the near future, prioritizing resources was needed and the
truly poor countries should be the focus. On trade liberalization, he
said it was important to recognize that the world was in an era when it
mastered manufacturing and was now entering a new era. Turning to IMF
assistance, he said the funds should have limitations on debt, but the fewer
strings attached, the greater the local economy would be boosted.
Referring to the Republic of Korea's phenomenal performance, he suggested that
its delegate should include IMF's inputs into his country's collaborative work
on a development model with UNDP.
Ms. HAHLEN,
responding to questions regarding ODA, said that since Goal 8 of the Millennium
Development Goals was created, many new challenges had emerged and the
landscape of development cooperation had changed. Regarding financing for
sustainable development, ODA alone could not “do the trick” and that all
stakeholders should be brought on board. She noted that since European
Union Member States had committed to the time bound ODA target, they had at
least “done something”, under the pressure of time and global economic
crisis. “We would like to see other countries set the bar higher,” she
said.
Mr. BERGLÖF,
addressing a question on the relationship between economic growth and
productivity, explained that the correlation between the two was a long-term
one. In the short term, there were indeed occasions when growth was
increased without improving productivity, or when productivity was improved without
generating more income. He emphasized the need for each country to make
smart use of development finance according to its own situation and
characteristics. Citing his experience in promoting energy efficiency in
the developing world, he said it was important to adopt a results-oriented
approach in providing funding.
Mr. MUHTAR
said that progress in scaling up development aid efforts could not be
neglected, but the challenge was how to build on that. Setting the
Millennium Goals had helped developing countries mobilize resources, and the
ongoing United Nations-led efforts in defining the post-2015 global development
agenda would provide an opportunity to generate further support. In this
process, it was important to have more voices speaking out for developing
countries, he said, adding that the private sector, philanthropies and civil
society were making great contributions to the discussions. He also
stressed the importance of reducing aid dependence, promoting trade and
strengthening South-South cooperation. Responding to the comment from a
representative of the private sector that direct cash transfers used by some
multilateral development agencies indicated the failure of ODA in achieving
effectiveness, he said actually there had been many areas of success and cash
transfers were only complementary to the much wider efforts. At the same
time, he stressed that improving aid effectiveness and enhancing accountability
were very important.
Round
Table III
The
roundtable on “The role of financial and technical development cooperation,
including innovative sources of development finance, in leveraging the
mobilization of domestic and international financial resources for sustainable
development” was chaired by František Ružička, Member of the Intergovernmental
Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing and the Permanent
Representative of Slovakia to the United Nations.
Panellists
included Pertti Majanen, Co-Chair, Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on
Sustainable Development Financing, Helsinki, Finland; Jon Lomøy, Director,
Development Cooperation Directorate, Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD); Gargee Ghosh, Director of Policy and Finance, Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation; Mauricio Escanero, Alternate Permanent Representative
of Mexico to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO); and Gilles Alfandari, Senior Economist, International
Policy and Partnerships Group (IPPG), World Bank.
Mr. RUŽIČKA
said that developing countries continued to rely on global support and external
finance sources. In the Monterrey Consensus, countries had pledged 0.7
per cent of gross national income as ODA to least developed countries.
Those commitments were again reaffirmed at the United Nations Conference on
Sustainable Development, known as Rio+20. Yet aid had declined in recent
years just as the world accelerated efforts to achieve the Millennium
Development Goals. ODA fell in real terms two years in a row and aid to
least developing countries fell by 12.8 percent. The need for more
predicable international public financing had intensified the search for
alternative financing to complement ODA. It was vital to ensure
transparency and avoid duplicity. While South-South cooperation had a
role in boosting financing sources, it should not be used as a substitute for
transnational aid but rather as complementary to North-South cooperation.
Mr. MAJANEN
said the Monterrey Consensus and Doha Round had provided a strong foundation
and documents that were still relevant for today’s discussion. Now, the
objective was to produce a clear, action-oriented set of recommendations on
development financing that included policy recommendations and took into account
financing for the environment, including climate change and
bio-diversity. Despite being a small part of the financial flows to
developing countries, ODA had a central and important role in reducing and
eradicating poverty, especially in least developed countries. However,
more could be done. Developing countries needed to take more ownership,
while the international community needed to pursue more private flows so that
ODA could be more oriented toward poverty reduction. The reality of today
was that a major portion of financial flows for development would come from the
private sector.
Mr. LOMØY
said frequently discussions about development were conversations about misery
and did not emphasize the great progress made in reducing poverty, improving
access education and health services. The global community should
celebrate the success in reaching the first Millennium target and an important
part of the dialogue should be about opportunities, particularly as the
discourse about post-2015 took shape. Much important input had been
received and an inspiring agenda had formed. For the first time in human
history, eliminating poverty was a realistic possibility. The world had
changed a great deal since Monterrey and never before had there been more
resources for development available.
Three
major elements that formed the financing picture, including domestic resource
mobilization, private investments and public financing, he said. The
first was instrumental and ensured developing countries took their share of
responsibility through increased tax bases, elimination of large-scale tax
exceptions and streamlined taxation of natural resources. With regard to
private financing, he underlined the need for a more creative and strategic use
of public-private resources. There also must be greater acknowledgement
of the successes of ODA. The world needed to “talk up” ODA more instead
of lamenting its decline and struggles, which risked turning its failures into
a self-fulfilling prophecy. In particular, the international community
must celebrate cases where recipient countries were now ODA providers.
Ms. GHOSH
recalled how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation focused much of its work on
combating extreme poverty and improving access to financial services. The
Foundation was focused on telling the story on what ODA could do and how it
could be quite effective. It remained committed to promoting the next set
of development goals, which she hoped would be just as specific and centred as
the Millennium Development Goals. It was important to enhance the
effectiveness of resources and transparency, reduce the volatility of aid and
modernize efficient mechanisms of delivering aid.
Beyond
ODA, the Foundation was working with new development finance landscapes, she
said, pointing to projects with Saudi Arabia, China and Brazil. The new
finance flows focused on neighbouring countries and mutually beneficial
outcomes. In the next decade of development finance, the Foundation was
keen to support a crop of philanthropists to fill gaps in public programmes and
to understand specific results and tangible outcomes. In that regard,
there was certainly a need to develop projects that tapped into new sources of
financing. Innovation was about modernizing tools of finance and making
them more efficient from research to delivery. She emphasized the need to
provide a partial loss guarantee to reduce private investment risk
Mr. ESCANERO,
recalling his role as a facilitator in the Monterrey Consensus negotiations,
said the time was ripe to prepare a follow-up conference that would deepen a
holistic approach to development. Building on what had been done, and
reinforced at Rio+20, all efforts must concentrate on including the social,
economic, and environmental dimensions in the post-2015 development
agenda. Speaking in his national capacity, he said that for Mexico,
social inclusion was crucial as there was an unacceptable level of
inequality. The lead up to the post-2015 development agenda must include
a discussion on social inclusion that attacked the different dimensions of
poverty, including the lack of income, food, housing, and other basic
services.
In that
regard, global cooperation for development must be strengthened at the current
juncture when the world was expediting completion of the Millennium targets and
advancing towards a new development agenda. Reversing the decline of ODA
flow and addressing the challenges of middle-income countries was
important. He emphasized the challenges and opportunities posed by South-South
and Triangular Cooperation. A new platform must provide innovative
sources of development, such as international taxes on financial
transactions. ODA was also essential in financing climate change
mitigation.
Mr. ALFANDARI
called on the global community to mobilize funding on the supply side, select
better projects on the demand side, and identify ways to use funding more
effectively. A global development cooperation framework, increased public
spending with targeted and evidence-based policies, cooperative efforts that
produced and mobilized financing, and better-leveraged private sector resources
were needed to achieve the post-2015 goals. Developing countries must
take the lead in some regard and improve taxation capacity, harness sustainable
streams of natural resource revenue, and curb illicit financial flows.
ODA had been a relatively stable source of development financing for the
poorest economies as had remittances and foreign direct investments. The
development of fragile, conflict-affected regions relied heavily on ODA, he
said, calling for ODA in those vulnerable areas to be sustained. The
private sector could play a catalytic role in the overall development financing
picture, although better management of portfolios of potential investments and
projects that posed less risk was needed.
When the
floor was opened for discussion, the representative of Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, speaking on behalf of CARICOM, called for an immediate review
of the criteria used by multilateral financial institutions and some
development partners to graduate small highly indebted middle-income countries
from access to concessional resources. Issues of differentiation and
graduation greatly affected access to funding. The specific vulnerabilities
of small island developing States must be reflected in the economic
classification of countries.
The
representative of the European Union supported Mr. Escanero’s call
for a follow-up conference on financing for development. France’s
delegate said that innovative sources of financing were needed in the areas of
health, education and climate, and every State should be free to choose
suitable sources. He outlined three steps taken by his Government to
raise funds: the freeing up of loans to ensure flows of capital for things like
vaccinations; implementing solidarity taxes on airplane tickets to help
leverage supplementary resources; and allocating 10 per cent of
national tax to financing for development. Although innovative financing
offered a diversity of opportunities, it was important to remember that primary
financing must come from national resources, which must also ensure equitable
distribution of wealth.
The
representative of Portugal said that the main challenge in seeking
innovative sources of financing was strengthening synergies between financial
sources and achieving the right combination of partners. The
representative of the Republic of Korea said that while private flows
had an important role to play, it was concerning that often private investments
were directed at certain countries and toward specific sectors. For
example, only 2 per cent of private flows went to least developed
countries.
Several
members of civil society and the private sector also participated in the
interactive discussion. One civil society representative underscored the
need to examine why public resources were so inadequate. Financial
liberalization had made it too easy for capital to flow across borders, causing
a reduction of revenue available for public investment. Clamping down on
tax havens would help deal with imbalances that caused financial instability.
A speaker
from the private sector said that Governments must engage meaningfully with
that sector at local, national and global levels, with a focus on technical
cooperation and aid effectiveness. Echoing her sentiment another member
of the business sector said that while telecommunications and digital
technologies were significant contributors to GDP, in the developing world they
lacked efficiency and investor interest.
Continuing
the discussion, a civil society representative said that hunger and violence
were “loud cries” that society was not moving in the right direction. ODA
did little to balance the disparity caused by the exploitation of natural resources
in developing countries. Another civil society speaker, noting that far
too many women were living in poverty and did not have access to formal
financing services, stressed the need for their meaningful participation in
micro-credit and micro-savings initiatives.
In closing
remarks, several panellists stressed the need to address social inequality.
Mr. ALFANDARI said that as 970 million people worldwide still lived
below the poverty line, there was a lot of work to be done. Efforts must
mobilize political will first, and then budgets would follow.
Ms. GHOSH said it was important to move through different sources and
channels to understand an increasingly changing global market. That
required intermediaries who defined projects and found the best suited methods
of finance to adapt.
Mr. LOMOY
said that development was about more than money; it was about policies that
dealt with inequalities. Inequality was as much a part of the problem in
developing countries and least developed countries as it was in developed
countries. Illicit flows of funds, asset recovery regulations, and the
existing international taxation system all required examining to fit the
purpose of a developing global economy. Mr. MAJANEN pointed to
microfinancing as a well functioning system which had benefitted
100 million people.
Informal
Interactive Dialogue
In the
afternoon, the Assembly held an informal interactive dialogue, entitled “The
link between financing for development and achieving the internationally agreed
development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, and advancing
the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015”, that was chaired by Octavio
Errázuriz, Vice-President of the General Assembly.
Panelists
included Gyan Chandra Acharya, High Representative for the Least Developed
Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States;
Olav Kjørven, Special Adviser to the Administrator on the Post-2015 Development
Agenda, Bureau for Development Policy, United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP); and Daniel Titelman, Director of the Financing for Development
Division, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).
Mr. ERRÁZURIZ
said it was clear that the world had made significant progress in achieving the
Millennium Development Goals and that in the months ahead, the biggest
challenge would be how to move even faster towards them, with a focus on those
that were most off-track and on the countries that faced unique development
challenges. Mobilizing financing was also a central priority on a global
level. Countries needed to make every effort to mobilize domestic
resources, while there was obviously still a clear role for donor
countries. Sustainable development and the eradication of extreme poverty
must be at the centre of the new, post-2015 agenda, the success of which would
rest on the ability to implement a coherent and comprehensive financing
strategy.
The
renewed global partnership must also address issues such as climate change,
financing stability and tax evasion, he said. Many of these issues had
already been incorporated into the financing for development process. He
hoped the international community would seek solutions for building a renewed
global partnership for development, identify ways to integrate the three
dimensions of sustainable development into a financing framework, and determine
how the financing for development process could help shape the post-2015
agenda.
Mr. ACHARYA
said there was clear recognition that the Millennium Development Goals must be
supported by the international community, as outlined in Goal 8. However,
progress on a global partnership for development had fallen short of
expectations. While substantial progress had been made in many of the
Goals despite hardships in some countries, meeting the targets was still a
distant objective considering the 2015 deadline. Many countries’
dependence on natural capital, such as agriculture and fishing, must be taken
into account when mapping sustainable development in the post-2015
agenda. Traditional and additional sources, including private sector and
philanthropy, would also be critical to move the agenda forward.
The
92 least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small
island developing States had specific needs and challenges, he said.
Highly dependent on aid, the countries were disproportionately affected by
climate change and global economic crises. ODA had dropped in recent
years, but that train must be reversed as 2015 approached. Domestic
resources were also critical, but development was equally an international
responsibility. There should be ample support for infrastructure building
in energy and other sectors to drive development forward. An equal
emphasis must be on developing domestic resources and tax issues. Private
sector investment and concessional funding of infrastructure also must be
further examined. South-South and triangular cooperation were
increasingly becoming important for least developed, landlocked developed and small
island developing nations and the potential of those partnerships should be
enhanced. Innovative financial measures must be considered alongside
involving the private sector when considering a post-2015 agenda.
Mr. KJØRVEN
said that citizens around the world have been discussing on an unprecedented
level what should follow the Millennium Development Goals when they expired in
2015. Close to 1.5 million people had contributed to the discussion
through national consultations, thematic consultations and online platforms.
As a result, there was a much clearer picture of people’s priorities and a
number of themes had emerged, including the desire to fully achieve the
existing Millennium targets, particularly those that dealt with issues like
maternal and child mortality, and water and sanitation. Citizen input
also indicated that people wanted certain themes, such as education and health,
to continue after 2015.
The recent
financial crisis and subsequent decline in ODA meant this conversation was
taking place at a challenging time, he said. It was important to mobilize
resources from across the spectrum, including public and private sources, as
well those on the national and international levels. Curbing illicit
financial flows and increasing the capacities of tax administrators would help
increase domestic resources for sustainable development. High
expectations were also being placed on the private sector on how to catalyze
long-term finance. Opportunities for blending public and private finance
would be a critical dimension of the post-2015 development framework, as would
continued South-South cooperation.
Mr. TITELMAN
said the Monterrey Consensus was the first global attempt to address financing
for development in a number of areas, including sustainable debt financing and
enhancing the coherence of the international trading system. Those topics
were relevant today and for the post-2015 era. In addition, climate
change and transforming economies to boost growth and social development were
also concerns. One of the key issues in the new financing for development
was the global common good. Achieving goals beyond the Millennium targets
would require an even great pool of resources. Relevant to ODA, the
Monterrey Consensus set out a target of 0.7 per cent of gross national income,
but had fallen short with some countries allocating on average about 0.28
percent to ODA. Moreover, ODA had lost its relevant importance to other
sources of finance, including remittances, grants from financial donors, and private
capital. Those sources were now playing a great role in financing
development.
Innovative
mechanisms also generated new public revenue streams and debt-based instruments
such as debt swaps and public- private incentives guaranteeing private flow
mobilization, he said. The post-2015 agenda, which must incorporate the
social, economic and environmental dimension, was a global policy agenda
requiring the provision of global public goods. A growing number of
recipient countries received donations to mitigate climate change. Those
funds were generally difficult to access by countries which lacked the know-how
and financial resources. As in Monterrey, a key element of the future
2015-agenda was the need to strengthen domestic resource mobilization.
The development of international and domestic finance systems had proved
to be a complex process requiring new instruments that managed economic and
financial resources.
When the
floor was open to discussion, a representative of civil society said that
although many commitments had been made, they often did not come to
fruition. He believed that many of the problems were tied to the lack of
political will. If countries could reach agreement on reducing their
military budgets and use the saved resources on development, much more progress
could be made in achieving the Millennium Development Goals, he said.
The
representative of Jamaica stressed the need for promoting mobilization
of domestic funds. To achieve that, he said Governments needed to conduct
reforms to create an enabling environment to attract investment. He
outlined many efforts made by his country, including strengthening tax
administration and consolidating tax revenues, increasing global
competitiveness, and reducing fiscal deficits. He also emphasized the
importance of public and private partnership, saying that the private sector
could make significant contributions in many key areas of development, such as
improving infrastructure, enhancing information and communications technology
capacity and increasing energy diversification.
The
representative of Germany said it was important to return to the roots:
the Millennium Development Declaration and its goals. It was time to
separate the financing from the tasks and it was necessary to clarify the role
of participants to indentify the ownership of the tasks.
Chile’s representative said a Monterrey+ conference would serve
as an opportunity to recognize the social issues involved. The conference
should be held before 2015 so it could contribute in a meaningful way to
discussions on the post-2015 development agenda and renew and update the
international community’s commitment to social issues and poverty eradication.
The
representative of Sudan said the shrinking size of assistance from
developed countries had impacted developing countries. There was a
growing need to focus on poverty eradication and to give special assistance to
least developed countries to help those States build their economies.
Predictable funding and the flow of private capital were critical sources that
would, among other things, contribute to sustainable development.
The representative of the Republic of Korea said
ownership was key to development. In the coming years, with the
Millennium Development Goals’ deadline looming, the issue of financing was more
important than ever before. Limited resources needed to be used
effectively. The biggest challenges had been the decline in ODA, he said,
calling on countries to fulfil their commitments and end that trend.
Traditional ODA, innovative financing sources and private sector investment
were needed to move ahead to face new challenges, such as climate change.
The
representative of Mexico said the world was facing a defining political
moment as it moved towards 2015. The Monterrey Consensus should guide
collective efforts in the post-2015 era and the principles of shared economic
prosperity, social inclusion and development and the environmental perspective
must be considered. Monterrey should be comprehensive and should allow
all stakeholders to build a platform for financing that would be created with
consensus and would move towards concrete results for all people.
The
representative of Ecuador was concerned that commitments on financing
for development were not sufficiently fulfilled so far, and called for
strengthening implementation of the Monterrey Consensus and Doha
Declaration. He also stressed the need for reforming the current
international financial structure as well as strengthening cooperation and coordination
between international and regional financial institutions.
A
representative from the business sector underscored the importance of
revitalizing the financial intermediation process, which had been heavily
affected by the financial crisis. Bank and non-bank financial
intermediaries could play an important role in channelling funds into
development. A stock-taking process was needed to understand the current
situation and the challenges ahead.
A number
of representatives of civil society raised concerns about financing for
development. One speaker said debt left countries unable to provide
essential services to their people and debt cancellation offered opportunities
to use funds for healthcare, education and other areas targeted by the
Millennium Development Goals. Another said domestic economic growth was
the heart of all development, followed by other sources of financing, and the
national level was the starting point for efforts.
A
representative of the private sector said to attract more involvement by
private investment there was a need to produce “fresh ideas” and the processes
to follow through.
A
representative speaking on behalf of various women organizations said that when
setting the post-2015 development agenda and advancing the financing for
development process, adopting a gender perspective was essential, because
without empowering women, it was impossible to achieve real development.
In closing remarks, Mr. ACHARYA said that evidence from
the field had shown that strong leadership, well-designed development
strategies, effective financing mechanisms and supportive international
frameworks were important for reaching the Millennium Development Goals.
The international community must comprehensively address financing for
development. Looking forward to the post-2015 development agenda, he said
ODA remained an important financing source and should be more focused on the
most vulnerable countries. Meanwhile, the international community should
also provide aid to these countries in areas such as capacity building, trade
promotion, innovative financing and policymaking in order to attract more
investment.
Mr. TITELMAN
said that he agreed with certain speakers on the importance of increasing
productivity and domestic growth, which was a key element in the process of
mobilizing domestic resources. He also welcomed the idea of using the
Monterrey framework as a basis for discussing the post-2015 global development
agenda and expanding it to incorporate new challenges.
Closing
Remarks
Delivering
a statement on behalf of Mr. ASHE, President of the General Assembly, Mr.
ERRAZURIZ thanked the participants for their valuable contributions and constructive
interventions and outlined key points raised through the dialogue. Among
them were that a changing world required an adapted conceptual framework to
deal with new circumstances and challenges, particularly those related to
integrating the social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable
development, as well as to calls for an early conclusion of the World Trade
Organization Doha Round of trade negotiations and for countries to fulfil their
ODA commitments to bolster development. Many delegations also called for
the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to be held
before the end of 2015 in order to best contribute to the post-2015 agenda.
“I have
also sensed optimism that we can come together to meet the challenges of
sustainable development,” he said. “The resources are there, they just
need to be allocated effectively. This requires a true multi-stakeholder
effort and global partnership encompassing all stakeholders, in order to
expedite the mobilization of financial resources, public and private, at the
national, regional and international levels, for sustainable development.”
*
*** *
For information media • not an official record
US commandos get permanent Eastern European foothold
Published time: June 11, 2014 09:50
Edited time: June 11, 2014 12:56
Paratroopers from the U.S. Army's
173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team participate in training exercises with the
Polish 6 Airborne Brigade soldiers at the Land Forces Training Centre in
Oleszno near Drawsko Pomorskie, north west Poland, May 1, 2014.(Reuters /
Kacper Pempel )
Tags
American special operations units
permanently deployed in Eastern Europe are no longer just on the Pentagon’s
wish list. About 100 instructors are set to train spec ops teams in former
Soviet bloc states to ‘message’ Moscow over the conflict in Ukraine.
The latest statements from the US
European Command (EUCOM) once again prove that Washington is using the crisis
in Ukraine to revitalize the NATO alliance and bolster its military presence in
Europe in order to tie
it to the US.
EUCOM said in a statement that its
Special Operations Command Europe (SOCEUR) “increased the size and scope of
its planned exercises” following the bloody developments in Ukraine to send
a “message to Moscow.”
Though American commandos have
always been present at alternating military trainings in Eastern Europe, now
they plan to take up quarters there, reports Reuters.
SOCEUR spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel
Nick Sternberg acknowledged that “Training with our partners in their home
countries is something that we have always done.”
“The difference is that now we will
maintain a [permanent] Special Operations Forces presence in theater along the
eastern front of NATO on this training mission,” Sternberg explained.
American special forces instructors
are going to be stationed on the territory of the new NATO members states to
train local special forces the urban combat tactics, wet boat exercise during
mock assault raids, airdrops and drilling the visual gunnery spotters.
Paratroopers from the U.S. Army's
173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team participate in training exercises with the
Polish 6 Airborne Brigade soldiers at the Land Forces Training Centre in
Oleszno near Drawsko Pomorskie, north west Poland, May 1, 2014.(Reuters /
Kacper Pempel )
The crisis over federalization of
Ukraine has been going for two months now and so far country’s regular troops
and National Guards have been unable to suppress the defenses of pro-federalist
insurgents in the Russian-speaking eastern regions.
The battles in Ukraine exposed that
self-defense militia can successfully counter regular troops, and even manage
to shoot down assault helicopters and fighter jets, as well as burn APCs with
Soviet-made RPGs. The true number of Ukrainian servicemen who have died in the
clashes remains unpublished.
To prevent such a scenario on NATO
borders – and in new NATO member states - the US wants its special forces
instructors to train counter-insurgency specialists in such eastern Europe
countries as the Baltic States and Poland, dealing with a possible Ukrainian
scenario and also putting American commandos as close to Russia’s borders as
possible.
The Americans have been training
troops in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland for many years now. Every year
a whole set of international war games is being conducted in Europe with
military from the above-mentioned states unfailingly present.
In May and June there are five joint
international military drills held in Europe. ‘Exercise Flaming Sword’ in
Lithuania, ‘Exercise Combined Resolve’ in Germany and ‘Saber Strike’ ground
forces exercise conducted in all three Baltic States coincided with ‘Baltic
Host 2014’ and ‘Baltops 2014’ naval drills.
Such drills always bring together
special troops from the participant NATO member countries.
Yet still the skills of special
units from Baltic States are not close to those of the US Navy SEALS, Delta Force
or Britain's Special Air Service (SAS).
“They are still not up to US,
British or French capabilities, but some of the newer NATO special forces are
improving very quickly,"
Linda Robinson, an expert in special forces at the RAND Corporation think tank,
told Reuters.
Some units from the new NATO member
states also took part in the Afghan campaign, like Poland's GROM special unit.
U.S. army paratroopers attend
opening ceremony of NATO military exercise "Saber Strike" in Adazi,
Lithuania. June 9, 2014. (Reuters / Ints Kalnins)
During his recent European tour,
American President Barack Obama promised to defend the ‘territorial integrity’
of countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania, without
specifying which enemy might impinge upon it.
Obama told
newly-elected Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko that Washington would find
new ways to bolster Ukrainian military, like sending military instructors to
the country.
It’s hard to imagine that the US
could send their special forces to help Ukrainian government deal with
federalist insurgency in the east of the country, but American instructors
could train Ukrainian special units to do that work instead.
So far EUCOM has firmly stated that
no US forces have been deployed to Ukraine and that no Ukrainian troops are
involved in special forces training in Eastern Europe.
American special forces have been
extensively used in the Iraqi and Afghan campaigns, usually operating behind
enemy lines, conducting reconnaissance and performing clandestine operations
against Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces.
Since the 9/11 terrorist attack,
American special forces have doubled in number, with the budget tripling and
the number of operations expanding fourfold.
A U.S. soldier attends the opening
ceremony of NATO military exercise "Saber Strike" with Lithuanian
soldiers, in Adazi, Lithuania. June 9, 2014.(Reuters / Ints Kalnins)
'Public has no idea how NATO spends money': Dutch
auditors call for more transparency
Published time: June 11, 2014 13:33
Edited time: June 11, 2014 20:23
AFP Photo / Brendan Smialowski
Tags
Dutch auditors claim NATO member
states - which contribute to the organization’s budget from a combined $1
trillion in defense spending - are largely unaware of how these funds are being
spent, as most of the alliance’s expenditures remain classified.
For decades the accounting records
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which marked its 65th anniversary in
April, remained largely ‘blotted out’ as classified, leaving billions of NATO
dollars unaccounted for, claim auditors from the Netherlands.
The official controlling body of the
Dutch government, the Netherlands Court of Audit (NCA), which also audits the
funds annually allocated by Netherlands government on NATO activities,
collected information from open sources on NATO expenditures over the last 40
years. The results of this extensive research have been published last Tuesday
on a specially-created English language website.
The NCA stipulates it has no “specific
mandate to audit NATO,” yet the organization is involved in advising the
International Board of Auditors for NATO (IBAN). Financial inspections of the
last six years have brought auditors from IBAN, the NCA and other NATO member
states to the conclusion that bloc’s finances are not in order.
State officials from all of NATO’s
28 member states actually have no idea where the alliance’s funds go and who’s
the final recipient of huge amounts of money, the NCA claims.
Troops from the U.S. Army's 173rd
Infantry Brigade Combat Team parachute during a NATO-led exercise "Orzel
Alert" held together with Canada's 3rd Battalion and Princess Patricia's
Light Infantry, and Poland's 6th Airborne Brigade in Bledowska Desert in
Chechlo, near Olkusz, south Poland (Reuters / Kacper Pempel)
“NATO might be wasting a lot of
money, or maybe they are short of cash. Frankly, we have no idea,” shared NCA President Saskia Stuiveling.
A third, or $2.4 billion, of the
Netherlands’ $7.8 billion military budget in 2013 was spent on NATO missions in
Afghanistan. The lack of transparency of military spending “does not
contribute to the public support for NATO” among the Dutch citizens,
Stuiveling said.
The overall defense budget of all 28
NATO member states exceeds $1 trillion, of that about 75 percent is spent by
the US. Some of this money passes through NATO’s account books.
The alliance is financed by all
members through three general sources.
The first is a common fund ($3.3
billion) is used to maintain the main office and staff.
With over $707 million, the US is
the largest contributor to this fund. Next come Germany ($474), Great Britain
($358) and France ($357).
Two others are the international
mission fund (wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) and special projects fund (arms
development, etc.). These are funded by unknown additional contributions of
each NATO member state.
Not only funding of entities and
missions, but also how exactly and for what purpose the money in all three
funds is being spent could not be established from open sources.
The NCA found that 378 NATO
investment projects worth estimated $4.5 billion have remained open for
decades, since the 1990s and even the 1970s. None of these projects have ever
been evaluated or accounted for.
“We are an advocate of transparency
and accountability for all public expenditures, including those of NATO,” the president of the NCA said in a foreword to the
statement.
Troops from Canada's 3rd Division,
composed with a platoon of 3rd Battalion and Princess Patricia's Light
Infantry, participate at a NATO-led exercise "Orzel Alert" held
together with the U.S. Army's 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team and Poland's
6th Airborne Brigade in Bledowska Desert in Chechlo, near Olkusz, south Poland
(Reuters / Kacper Pempel)
Improving NATO’s public
accountability may also contribute to a greater understanding and therefore
better “efficiency and effectiveness of NATO,” Stuiveling said.
The situation remained unattended
for years, but now the NCA is preparing to put it on the agenda of NATO
Parliamentary Assembly in November 2014, to be held in The Hague.
The official comment from NATO
spokesperson confirmed that “some reports” cannot be made public due to
confidential nature of the issue. Still, all 28 NATO states “maintain full
control of the level of expenses and how the money is being spent” through
national representatives in the North Atlantic Council, which holds meetings
twice a week. The information distributed at these meetings is rarely shared
with external auditors supervising expenditure of taxpayers’ money.
The Netherlands Ministry of Defense
agreed with the NCA’s initiative as “viewed upon positively by the Dutch
cabinet,” as Dutch citizens would be better informed about NATO spending
allocated funds to ensure safety of the citizens of the alliance member
countries.
The ministry acknowledged that while
the civilian expenditures of NATO are constantly monitored, the money spent on
military missions (in Iraq, Afghanistan) and special military projects are not
audited properly, whereas they make up the most of all the expenses.
US President Barack Obama pointed
out in March that defense spending of some European countries is decreasing,
which also means that NATO budget is shrinking as well.
At a time of economic hardship, NATO
is constructing a huge new $1 billion headquarters in Brussels. The eight-floor
structure contains enough blast-proof glass to cover 10 football fields.
Yet
NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary-General Matthew Klimow told Reuters last
November that the “far-from-extravagant” new headquarters is a “functional
building that will allow us to say to the world that NATO is ready for
21st-century challenges.”
US airlines lobby Congress to shut out cheaper
European competitor