front page-executive summary - undp...3 panel on freedom from fear in the second panel, dr. georges...

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (Millennium +5 Summit) that is going to be held between the 14th and 16th of September 2005, the Arab NGO Network for Development, the United Nations Resident Coordinator, and the Collective of NGOs in Lebanon organized a discussion seminar of the Secretary General’s report raised to the Summit and entitled “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights”. The discussion session took place on the 29th of July 2005 and was attended by more than 145 civil society representatives and media personnel. The seminar aimed at bringing together experts and NGO activists and representatives for the discussion of the report and for mutual exchange of information and experiences. The following document includes the presentations of the four main panels of the session; Freedom from Want, Freedom from Fear, Freedom to Live in Dignity, and Reforms and Strengthening of the United Nations. It also highlights the main discussions that took place during the session and the resulting recommendations. Opening Session At the beginning of the session, the organizers noted that such events are highly significant for strengthening cooperation and partnership between the United Nations and civil society organizations (CSOs). Given that CSOs reflect the voice of the widest social sectors, they have a vital role as a partner for government and international organizations in setting, monitoring, evaluation, and assessment, of public policies in areas of development, human rights, and good governance. The world leaders’ summits in September will be a chance to look at the progress on achieving the MDGs since 2000. Also, it will be an opportunity to take decisions regarding peace processes and preservation, strengthening peace and security, enhancing the respect of human rights, and identifying the future of the United Nations. The United Nations had organized consultation sessions with CSOs and business sector in form of hearings on the 22nd and 23rd of June 2005, which were headed by the President of the United Nations General Assembly and attended by two-hundred and thirty civil society representatives. Based on these hearings and the feedback from various member states, the draft declaration to be adopted at the Millennium +5 Summit has been modified and will be further discussed at the national levels. This is why civil society organizations ought to have a say in the consultations taking place and the final declaration of the Summit. Panel on Freedom from Want In the first panel on Freedom from Want, Mr. Kamal Hamdan and Dr. Youcef El Khalil presented their analysis of the report. Mr. Hamdan noted that the report is the product of political and economic balances and trade-offs present in the world today. It attempts to be comprehensive, thus talking about the processes of MDGs and the commitments held at the national and global levels, including costing, indicators, and implementation

2

mechanisms. The report highlights the importance of the political decisions for moving forward on such processes. It calls for short, medium, and long term commitments of developed countries towards achieving the MDGs by the year 2015. However, on progress of the MDGs, the report talks about the bulk of the developing countries and does not differentiate between regions and countries. It links between the various challenges our world is facing, including development, human rights, and peace and security, and talks about the responsibilities and needed changes in policies of the developed countries. However, the reference to the responsibilities of developed countries is much more limited than that of developing countries, reflecting an underlying indication to the primary responsibility of developing countries in such processes. Mr. Hamdan talked about the failure of the report to set practical mechanisms for the achievement of the goal number eight, which revolves around the global economic system and trade relations, control of mechanisms for international exchange, job creation and unemployment problems, as well as aid and debt among other issues. The failure to address issues of fair trade and the complexities of trade-offs between developed and developing countries within the current system have been reflected in the failure of negotiations within the World Trade Organization (WTO), especially the failure of the ministerial meetings in Seattle and in Cancun. Moreover, the report fails to seriously address the issue of global movement of financial assets, which reached $400 billion from the South to the North in 2004. Moreover, the report overstresses the role of the private sector without any clarification of the role of the public sector and the relation between the two sectors. This could be a step towards limiting the scope of the public sector’s role. In the second presentation, Dr. El Khalil highlighted two approaches to analyze the report including the approach of developing countries given their internal national conditions and the global approach given the balance between developed and developing countries. Although the report is a valuable document, which is objective and comprehensive in setting goals, it significantly lacks practical and effective proposals mainly when tackling the goal number eight. Dr. El Khalil highlighted that the issues at hand today results from major summits of the current Millennium, starting with the Monterrey Summit in 2002 which addressed financing for development, the Brussels meeting of the European Union in May 2005, followed by the Summit of the G8 in July 2005 in Scotland. In 2002, developed countries committed to increase their aid to developing countries as a percentage of their gross domestic product (GDP) from 0.3% to 0.56% and up to 0.7%. The commitment of developing countries to give aid goes back to 1974, yet we have lived a history of failed commitments. Although progress is at hand, still this progress is highly dependant on political balances and trade-offs. Aid has actually decreased between the beginning and the end of the nineties from 0.33% of developed countries’ GDP to 0.22%. Moreover, the current challenges that the developed countries face, including budget deficits and national decision making structures, will have a significant impact on their ability to reach their commitments in aid increase.

3

Panel on Freedom from Fear In the second panel, Dr. Georges Kosaifi addressed the report’s section on Freedom from Fear. He explained that the General Secretary’s report is a reflection of neo-liberal conceptions and approaches to development as well as the United States’ approach to dealing with terrorism, nuclear weaponry, and security issues. Accordingly, there is a need to re-look into the report from a balanced perspective that presents the views and policy approaches of both the South and the North. Regarding the issues of development, the report stresses the role of the private sector with no explanation for the role of the government. In addition, reasons behind poverty are presented as internal factors to poor countries while avoiding explanation of the real shared reasons behind the current levels of poverty in the world. As for the political dimension of the report, which stresses terrorism and militarization issues, the report stresses on the terrorism of individuals and not of states. It equalizes between the threat of small weaponry and weapons of mass destruction, and it does not address the role played by countries which supported the Al Qaeda and Taliban in certain periods of time before 11th of September 2001. The report lacks reference to people’s right to self-determination and their right to organize resistance against foreign occupation while it stresses the right to combat terrorism. It stresses on the need to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons while not addressing the urgent and necessary need to stop nuclear testing. In addition, the report calls for developing new laws to deal with the groups that do not respect international law while not mentioning any steps towards the states that do not abide by international law. Dr. Kosaifi addressed these issues through analyzing several paragraphs of the report including paragraphs 10, 80, 81, 88, 90, 91, and 133. He stressed that the credibility of the United Nations is at stake if the Secretary General’s report will be adopted in its current language and proposals. The United Nations will loose its role as a reference for the respect of universal human rights and values. Accordingly, he called for a comprehensive revision of the report towards achieving balance between proposals and perspectives from the North and the South. Panel on Freedom to Live in Dignity In the third panel on Freedom to Live in Dignity, Ms. Mary Rose Zalzal addressed dignity as an indispensable right and not a choice that can be negotiated. Accordingly, the international conventions on human rights cannot be detached; they are the result of generations of human experience and accumulation of lessons. She noted that the title of the report ought to be “Enhancing People’s Ability to Live in Dignity” instead of “Freedom to Live in Dignity”. Living in dignity can be achieved through increasing awareness of this value and right and enhancing the mechanisms for achieving and preserving it through the rights system at the national, regional, and global levels. Ms. Zalal explained that the approach and proposals presented in the report, such as the strengthening of the human rights mechanisms through a Human Rights Council, are not enough to guarantee the rule of rights. Also, the language of the report calling for ethical

4

and moral yet not legal commitment to human rights is considered as a step backward. The level of commitment to human rights ought to preserve the legal dimensions, including ratification of the conventions and modifications in national laws and regulations to meet the standards set by the international conventions. The need for a just international law and practical conventions is higher in poor countries where respect of human rights is not a priority, such as is the case in the twenty two Arab countries today. In this context, there is a need to clarify what the report means when referring to human rights, especially that the universal declaration of human rights and the set of conventions include the right to development, the right to security, as well as the right to freedom from hunger, fear, and want. It is also inevitable to realize the need for mobilization of political decisions in order to achieve progress on issues of human rights. On the same panel, Mr. Ziad Baroud addressed the report’s content by indicating that its importance lies in the self-criticism approach it presents of the United Nations system. He explained that the report considers human rights and human dignity as two aims by themselves. However, the mechanisms to reach these two aims are still problematic and debatable. Mr. Baroud noted that the “Rule of Law” concept has been often used to mean the “State of Law” instead of the “State of Rights”. However, it should be noted that the State of Law is a limited concept that can be flawed and is subject to the nature of the law that could sometimes be used in violations of human rights. However, the State of Rights is a much more open, objective, and consistent concept since it relies on human rights in the first place. Mr. Baroud tried to analyze the report through looking at several related issues in Lebanon, including the Lebanese associations’ law and constitutional provisions. He stressed that mechanisms for implementing principles that the report calls for, such as responsibility for peace and security, are not clear and well defined. It also does not address the conflict between international and national laws. He indicated that human rights are tackled through several sections of the report including sections on peace, security, and rule of law. The proposal to establish a permanent Human Rights Council represents a very practical step towards setting more efficient mechanisms for human rights implementation. As for democracy, the report stresses the role of the United Nations beyond setting standards and criteria and in enhancement of internal democratic processes. Yet, the report still fails to answer questions on the role of the United Nations in protecting citizens from states that refuse to respect their human rights. In the end, Mr. Baroud stressed the importance of the report and called on civil society organizations to build on this report towards achieving more cooperation and partnership with the United Nations agencies. Panel on the Reforms and Strengthening of the United Nations In the last panel, Ambassador Riyad Tabbara addressed the report’s section tackling reforms of the United Nations. He concentrated in his presentation on the reforms needed at Secretariat of the United Nations. Ambassador Tabbara explained that the report called for three main conditions for a strong and efficient Secretariat for the United Nations including the compatibility, commitment, and dedication of the United Nations personnel

5

and staff, the limitation of bureaucratic processes within the institution, and the accountability of the staffs. The presentation was based on the report “Status of the United Nations Management Reform”, which was issued by the United Nations on 18th of July 2005. The report discussed the compatibility of senior staff and highlighted the inadequacy of the process of staff selection. Mr. Tabarra revisited the United Nations processes during the 50’s and 60’s, when staff’s selection took place without any interference from governments, although taking into consideration geographical balances. He explained that the process was based on the recommendations of high level practitioners in each field. He also talked about the inefficiency of current reform recommendations which often call for the formation of staff monitoring committees, while one of the main conditions for a more efficient Secretariat is to decrease bureaucratic processes. Discussion session During the open discussions following the six presentations, participants stressed on several issues mainly concerning the following: - The need for comprehensive reform of the United Nations including the Security

Council and the General Assembly - The importance of political will in order to protect decisions on economic and

social development - The importance of an enhanced partnership between the United Nations and civil

society organizations - The vitality of the voice and feedback of all social sectors on the Secretary

General’s report - The necessity of addressing the roots of terrorism and the problems that lead to

the anger of people around the world - The lack of clear and firm implementation mechanisms for the United Nations

resolutions - The needed synergies and coherence between the World Bank, the International

Monetary Fund and the United Nations - The need to address corruption as a main issue on the agenda of the international

community - The need to address issues of genetic mutilation and neo-technologies that deal

with human, animal, and plant genes and which the private sector is developing agreements around

- The need for specific timeframe and practical mechanism based on common but differential responsibilities for moving forward on international environmental commitments

- The need to fight unilateralism in international decision making - The need for alleviation of the impact of the World Trade Organization, the

policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and the control of the multinational companies on developing countries

6

- The essentiality of a proper definition of terrorism and a clear distinction between terrorism and the right to self-determination and to organize resistance against foreign occupation

- The needed efforts for reaching a binding convention on small arms - The elimination of all reservations on international human rights conventions

especially those that deal with women’s issues, and the need for new laws that protects the family

7

Report on the Discussion Seminar of the United Nations Secretary General Report “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights”

INTRODUCTION: The Arab NGO Network for Development, the United Nations Resident Coordinator, and the Collective of NGOs in Lebanon organized a discussion seminar of the United Nations Secretary General’s report “In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights”. The seminar took place on Friday the 29th of July 2005, in the United Nations House in Beirut. The aim of the seminar was to bring together experts and NGO activists and representatives for the discussion of the report and for mutual exchange of information and experiences. The report constitutes the main agenda to be taken up and acted upon at the world leaders summit which is going to be held between the 14th and 16th of September 2005 in New York. The summit will review progress achieved since the Millennium Declaration was adopted by all United Nations member states in 2000. The Secretary General’s report1 is based on four main reports including; the report prepared by Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, head of the Millennium Development Project, entitled “Investing in Development; a Practical Plan to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals”, the World Bank’s report entitled “Global Monitoring Report 2005”, the Cardoso report on the United Nations and civil society relations, as well as the report of the United Nations Secretary General’s High Level Panel “A More Secured World: Our Shared Responsibility”. The seminar was organized around four sessions reflecting the four main themes of the report: - Freedom from Want - Freedom from Fear - Freedom to Live in Dignity - Strengthening the United Nations

The seminar was attended by more than 145 participants and media personnel and was moderated by Dr. Hassan Krayem from the Governance Policies Department at the United Nations Development Program.

1 To review the report “In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights”, please visit the United Nations websites: www.un.org.lb or http://www.un.org/arabic/largerfreedom/sgreport.html

8

OPENING SESSION SPEECHES: Speech of Dr. Mona Hammam, Resident Coordinator of the United Nations in Lebanon In her opening speech notes, Dr. Mona Hammam proceeded by referring to the upcoming summit of world leaders in New York during September 2005, to which the United Nations Secretary General will present his report entitled “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights”. Dr. Hamam highlighted the importance of developing relationships between the United Nations and civil society organizations in Lebanon, and which is reflected in the full partnership in organizing the discussion seminar of the Secretary General report. She explained that civil society is considered a partner for government and international organizations in setting, monitoring, evaluating, and assessing public policies in areas of development, human rights, and good governance. Civil society organizations are the agents which reflect the voice of the widest social sectors in such policies. The Secretary General’s report laid out the challenges that face the world today and the importance of linking issues of development, security, human rights, and reforms of the United Nations for setting sound national strategies and policies. It was divided into four main sections: - Freedom from Want - Freedom from Fear - Freedom to Live in Dignity - Reforms of the United Nations

Dr. Hammam explained that development, human rights, security, and reforms are interlinked factors, which each of the government, civil society, and private sector share responsibility for. Successful partnership between the three sectors is essential for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Accordingly, the United Nations invites civil society to participate in discussion of the Secretary General’s report and participate and influence national policy making within a common global vision regarding development, human rights, and global peace and security. At the end, the Resident Coordinator indicated the significance of the strong relationship between the United Nations agencies and civil society groups in Lebanon. She stressed as well the importance of developing a stronger relation between government and civil society, specifically given the current situation that Lebanon is passing through and the urgency of enhancing development, human rights protection, and democratic processes.

9

Speech of Mr. Ziad Abdel Samad, Executive Director of the Arab NGO Network for Development Mr. Ziad Abdel Samad commenced his notes by talking about the United Nations General Assembly Special Session that will be held between the 14th and 16th of September 2005. The Summit (Millennium +5 Summit) comes five years after the Millennium Summit in 2000, from which the Millennium declaration resulted and identified poverty alleviation as the priority of the 3rd Millennium. The Millennium Declaration was based on the resulting outcomes of the United Nations summits that were held throughout the 90’s, including the summit on sustainable development, human rights, social development, as well as women’s and child’s rights. In all those summits, civil society organizations have had a significant and increasing role. Mr. Abdel Samad noted the various implications of international incidents on global dynamics and international relations, including the events of the 11th of September 2001, the military interference and occupation in each of Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the Tsunami in South East Asia. He explained that the current conception of security is based on military dimensions, while neglecting human security in all its aspects. The security of the powerful some is being prioritized over the security of humans in general and unilateral decision making on the global scene is enforcing this approach in spite of the United Nation’s role, especially that of the Security Council. Accordingly, the gathering of world leaders in the upcoming Summit will be a chance to take the right steps towards changing the current situation and moving towards the achievement of the MDGs by 2015. It should be taken into consideration that besides that, the Summit will be an opportunity to make decisions regarding peace processes and peace preservation, respect of human rights, and identification of the future of the United Nations. The Secretary General’s report entitled “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights” presents a strong linkage between these four areas, indicating that none can be achieved without the others. Mr. Abdel Samad stressed that the global issues we face today cannot be the responsibility of officials solely, whether elected or assigned. Individuals and civil society organizations have an essential role in the decision-making process. In that context, the Arab NGO Network for Development, the Collective of NGOs in Lebanon, and the United Nations Development Program took the initiative to organize the discussion seminar for Lebanese non-governmental organizations to participate in the preparations for the Millennium +5 Summit in September. The United Nations have organized consultation sessions with civil society groups on the 22nd and 23rd of June 2005, which were headed by the President of the United Nations General Assembly. Two-hundred and thirty civil society representatives participated in the consultations which were divided into five tracks: - A session on Freedom from Want which focused on the first seven goals of the

MDGs tackling poverty, education, health, gender equality, and sustainable development

10

- Another session on Freedom from Want which focused on the eighth goal of the MDGs stressing the respect of human rights instead of the prioritization of free trade policies and open markets

- A session on Freedom from Fear which focused on the interlinks between development, peace, and respect of human rights

- A session on Freedom to live in Dignity - A session on Strengthening the United Nations

Based on these sessions and the feedback of various member states, the draft declaration to be adopted at the Millennium +5 Summit has been adjusted and will be further discussed at the national levels. This is why civil society organizations ought to have a say in the consultations taking place and the final declaration of the Summit. Mr. Abdel Samad ended his notes by highlighting the importance of the discussion session, for various groups in the Arab region and Lebanon ought to take part in the process which will impact the future of the United Nations and the commitments of its member states. Accordingly, he invited participants in the discussion session to frame specific recommendations that can be raised to the Lebanese government, which could in turn present it at the United Nations Summit.

11

PANEL ON FREEDOM FROM WANT: Presentation of Mr. Kamal Hamdan In his presentation, Mr. Hamdan indicated the following; The report is the outcome of a process of development summits that were held throughout the nineties. It is the product of political and economic balances and trade-offs present in the world today. Accordingly, some of the positive aspects of the report can be summed up in the following: - It attempts a comprehensive approach - It talks about the processes of setting the MDGs and the commitments held at the

national and global levels - It talks about the costing process of the MDGs achievement - It talks about the implementation process of the MDGs and its related indicators

In this regards, the report pushes for taking practical steps and reaching a work plan that would be endorsed by world leaders in the upcoming Summit of the United Nations. The report explains that progress have been achieved in combating poverty around the world, at different levels in various regions. Yet, in many countries, it is unsure that the MDGs are going to be achieved by the year 2015. While stressing the progress in achieving the MDGs, the report talks about the bulk of the developing countries and does not differentiate between various regions and countries. It is worth noting that most of the growth achieved during the nineties took place in each of China and India, while the number of poor in general has increased around the world. The report stresses the commitments of developed countries on the short, medium, and long terms in order to ensure that the MDGs are going to be achieved and the needed processes implemented. In this regards, the report highlights the importance of the political decision for moving forward on such processes. Moreover, the report presents an important link between various challenges and problematic issues facing the world today. It also links between the changes and reforms needed in the countries that are receiving aid, including political, social, and economic reforms, as well as transparency and good governance. The report as well talks about the responsibilities and needed changes in policies of the developed countries, but to a much lesser extent than what was said about developing countries. It thus reflects an underlying indication to the primary responsibility of developing countries in these processes. The report also overstresses the role of the private sector. This could be a step towards limiting the scope of the public sector’s role. Yet, it is of high importance to redefine the commitment of the public sector towards basic services such as education as well as the processes of investing in the human resources. The eighth goal of the MDGs, which is the most important of the goals, is still vague in its presentation. Goal number eight revolves around the global economic system and trade relations, control of mechanisms for international exchange, job creation and

12

unemployment problems, as well as aid and debt among other issues. The report tried to set medium-term mechanisms to address those issues. Yet, long has been the debate around these issues in various literatures; but till now no practical mechanism has been set in place. It is still unclear what free trade and fair trade stand for. In this context, developed countries are in control of world trade mechanisms and structures, while asking developing countries to accept this reality and open up their markets. The call for change of the current system is still in words and not in practical steps. The report calls on developed countries to decrease tariffs and non-tariff barriers on merchandise and products from developing countries. It also highlights the need for gradual decrease in the subsidies that developed countries, mainly the United States and the European Union, offer to its agricultural sectors. This subsidy system puts a lot of pressure on the agricultural sector of developing countries, which represents their most important productive sectors. The failure of negotiations within the World Trade Organization (WTO), which was highlighted by the failure of the WTO Ministerial Meetings in both Seattle and Cancun, reflects the negative and complex relations between developed and developing countries given the current system. A real step forward would need a practical proposal with set timeframe and mechanisms that address the subsidization system of developed countries. In addition, practical steps would be needed regarding the implementation of the agreement on Intellectual Property Rights, quotas, and indicators and standards. Moreover, the report fails to address the issue of global movement of financial assets. According to the latest statistics of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), financial flows reached $400 billion from the South to the North in 2004, while in 1994 the amount was limited to $20 billion. It is important to address such flow of financial assets from the developing countries into huge markets such as the United States, given that it could be a main drive for growth. The report also does not address issues such as the brain drain in developing countries and the availability of jobs as well as the division of jobs among the North and the South. Several proposals from world leaders such as Lula, the president of Brazil, and Chirac, the president of France, were developed to support the achievement of the MDGs. These include taxes on financial transactions. However, the structures to manage such proposals and criteria to use the resulting amounts remain under big questions.

13

Presentation of Dr. Youcef El Khalil In his presentation, Dr. El Khalil indicated that; The report can be analyzed from two approaches: - The approach of developing countries given their internal national conditions - The global approach given the balance between developed and developing

countries From the first perspective, the report is a valuable document, which is objective and comprehensive in setting goals. It highlights the deteriorated conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa where children are dying due to the lack of needs costing 1 or 2 dollars. From the second perspective, which tackles mainly the eighth goal of the MDGs, the report significantly lacks practical and effective proposals. For example, target 132 under goal eight tackles the special needs of developing countries exports and standards and measurements used in this area. Yet, page 22 of the report, which tackles goal number eight, does not address the need to decrease barriers facing the exports of developing countries. The report addresses the need to increase humanitarian aid and not aid for development. It is worth realizing that the issues at hand today are built on the outcomes of major summits of the current Millennium, starting from the Monterrey Summit in 2002 which addressed financing for development, the Brussels meeting of the European Union in May 2005, followed by the Summit of the G8 in July 2005 in Scotland. In 2002, developed countries committed to increase their aid to developing countries as a percentage of their gross domestic product (GDP) from 0.3% to 0.56% and up to 0.77%. Yet this commitment is not a short-term process, but will be implemented gradually, starting in 2010 and over a long period of time. The theories behind gradual increase of aid are based on an explanation claiming that most aid goes to infrastructure development and thus should be gradually given out. Moreover, this approach takes into consideration the “Dutch Disease” syndrome, which could result from high flows of foreign currency in a specific market which affects the exchange levels of the local currency and pushes it towards an increase, thus limiting its exports. The commitment of developing countries to give aid goes back to 1974 when countries committed to the new economic order calling for enhancing the exports of third world countries. In 1975, the Lima Declaration was issued, which called for a commitment to have 25% of the world exports originate from developing countries by the year 2000. In 1980, the Arusha Declaration addressed progress on financial relations in the world. In 2 Target 13 under MDG eight addresses “the special needs of the least developed countries and includes tariffs and quota free access for least developed countries’ exports, enhanced program of debt relief for Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) and cancellation of official bilateral debt, and more generous official development aid (ODA) for countries committed to poverty reduction”.

14

1995 came the World Summit on Sustainable Development and the Copenhagen Declaration, which called for achieving full employment in developing countries. It is evident that we lived a history of failed commitments. Although progress is at hand, but still this progress is highly dependant on political balances and trade-offs. Aid has actually decreased between the beginning and the end of the nineties from 0.33% of the GDP of developed countries to 0.22%. In fact, the current challenges facing developed countries will have a significant impact on their ability to reach their commitment in aid increase. This includes several factors that need to be taken into consideration: - Budget deficits in the European countries are increasing - Although aid from Europe increased in 2004 to reach around $79 billion

compared to around $50 billion in the nineties, yet much of this increase resulted from the fluctuation in exchange rates of the Euro. In addition, much of the aid is not new money but is part of the debt cancellation that took place over that period.

- The current performance of developed and industrialized countries, in specific that of the United States, will impact the process as well. During the G8 meeting, Bush committed to double the US aid to Sub-Saharan Africa. Currently the United States gives $3.4 billion in aid for all Sub-Saharan Africa countries (a little more than what it currently offers Israel alone). Yet, short after the G8 summit, the American Congress took a decision to decrease the funds available in the “Millennium Challenge Account” from $5 billion to $1.7 billion.

15

PANEL ON FREEDOM FROM FEAR: Presentation of Dr. Georges Kosaifi In his presentation, Dr. Kosaifi indicated that; The report can be reviewed given specific realities including: - The role and interest of the South, specifically Arab countries, in issues of

development and combating state and individual terrorism - The importance of respect and implementation of international human rights

conventions in the world today - As well as the essential role of the United Nations in preserving rights and

common human interests while avoiding the impact of specific country interests and double standards

It is hard to state that the report under discussion present objective perspectives. It is actually a reflection of neo-liberal conceptions and approaches to development as well as the United States’ approach to dealing with terrorism, nuclear weaponry, and security issues. Accordingly, there is a need to re-look into the report from a balanced perspective that presents the views and policy approaches of both the South and the North. Regarding the issues of development, the report stresses the role of the private sector with no explanation for the role of the government. In addition, reasons behind poverty are presented as internal factors to poor countries while avoiding explanation of the real global reasons behind the current levels of poverty in the world. In this regards, the report promotes the role of the Bretton Woods institutions, whose policies, as described by Nobel Prize winner Dr. Joseph Stiglitz, reflect the interests of developed countries. As for the political dimension of the report, which stresses terrorism and militarization issues, the unbalanced reflection of developed countries’ perspectives can be seen in several areas, including: 1. Stressing terrorism of individuals and neglecting terrorism of states 2. Equalizing between the threat of small weaponry and weapons of mass

destruction which is available only in developed countries in addition to some other countries

3. Not addressing the role played by countries which supported the Al Qaeda and Taliban in certain periods of time before September 11th 2001

4. Not stressing on people’s right to self-determination and their right to organize resistance against foreign occupation as much as the right to combat terrorism is stressed

5. Stressing on the need to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons while not addressing the urgent and necessary need to stop nuclear testing as a step towards stopping proliferation of the weapons

16

6. Calling for developing new laws to deal with the groups that do not respect international law while not mentioning any steps to be taken towards the states that do not respect this law

Accordingly, there is a vital need to revise the report and introduce a balance between the interests of countries of the South and the North. On the reports items dealing with freedom from fear, the following points can be stated: Paragraph 10 talks about the harm to the credibility of the United Nations due to the war on Iraq, referring it to the inability of the United Nations to implement its resolutions and its inability to stop war. This paragraph lacks any reflection of the debates that took place in the Security Council and does not address the unilateralism of the United States and the United Kingdom in going to war. Paragraph 80 of the report indicates that any nuclear attack on the United States or Europe will result in mass destruction around the world. This paragraph solely refers to the United States and Europe with no reference or consideration to other countries or regions. Thus, this paragraph needs rewriting to refer to all regions of the world. Paragraph 81 talks about the need to work for elimination of small and medium weaponry with the same level of efforts for elimination of weapons of mass destruction. This paragraph equalizes between the impact of small and medium weaponry and that of weapons of mass destruction which does not reflect a balanced approach to dealing with the weaponry problem. Paragraph 88 talks about five main factors as basis for the strategy against terrorism including stopping states from offering support to terrorist groups. However, it is important to realize that terrorism did not start with the September 11th events. The United States and other countries have supported the Al Qaeda and Taliban groups before 2001, and the international community has the right to know the nature of the relationship that existed between them in that period. Paragraph 90 indicates that the failure of member states to agree on a definition of terrorism have impacted the credibility of the United Nation’s role. Here, it is important to stress the vitality and urgency of reaching a clear and well stated definition of terrorism, in which there is a clear reference to the right of people to self-determination and to organize resistance against foreign occupation. Paragraph 91 talks about the need to stop negotiations and debate about terrorism of states since the use of force by states is well regulated and dealt with by several international laws and agreements. This leads to an inability to take action against states, such as Israel, which still do not abide by these agreements. Besides, paragraph 91 talks about the need for a clear definition of “the right to resist occupation”. Such a definition and distinction from individual terrorism is vital for any progress on tackling terrorism. Here, it is worth questioning whether settlers in the occupied West

17

Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights are legal and legitimate or not. This issue needs a clear answer from the United Nations which still has not provided any stands on this issue. Paragraph 133 talks about the ability of groups that do not abide by the rule of law, including terrorist groups, to overcome the role that international institutions play. Accordingly, the report stresses the need to establish new laws and structures that can deal with such acts and groups. However, the remaining question is about the actions to be taken against state terrorism, given that many countries, such as Israel, still do not abide by the United Nations’ resolutions and undertake illegitimate military actions against the Palestinians. Moreover, the United States and the United Kingdom went to war against Iraq in spite of the decisions of the Security Council. It is important to note that the credibility of the United Nations is at stake if the Secretary General’s report will be adopted in its current language and proposals leading the United Nations to loose its role as a reference for the respect of universal human rights and values.

18

PANEL OF FREEDOM TO LIVE IN DIGNITY: Presentation of Ms. Mary Rose Zalzal In her presentation, Ms. Zalzal indicated that; Living in dignity is not a choice and cannot be negotiated. One can be stopped from living in dignity but cannot be detached from his right to live in dignity. In this context, the international conventions on human rights cannot be separated; they are the result of generations of human experience and accumulation of lessons. It is worth noting that the title of the report ought to be “Enhancing People’s Ability to Live in Dignity” instead of “Freedom to Live in Dignity”. Living in dignity can be achieved through increasing awareness of this value and right and enhancing the mechanisms for achieving and preserving it at the national, regional, and global levels. This is what the Secretary General tries to stress through the report, especially through highlighting the link between human rights and development, peace, and security. It is worth noting that the Arab and Muslim people have had a significant role in establishing the international human rights system and setting its conventions. The participation of Charles Malek, Omar Lotfi, and Badiyah Afnan in the elaboration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was an effective and significant participation, which makes it the heritage of the Arab peoples as much as it is the heritage of other peoples. It is worth noting that law can be used as a tool by the authorities and a means for control and violations of human rights. Accordingly, it is not expected that the Secretary General’s report refers to the rule of law in that sense. We struggle for having law as insurance for the respect of rights, while organizing the relations among people. We expect the human rights system to push for the rule of law of rights and not merely the rule of law. The Secretary General explains that the human being does not have to choose between aspects that are all included within her/ his rights, such as between security and development or between security and food. It should be assured that human rights are non-divisible. Moreover, the report stresses that state’s sovereignty is at the core principles of international law. However, the responsibility of the international community is to interfere in cases of inability of a state to control and manage internal stability and security, especially against terrorist groupings. The proposals presented by the report, such as the strengthening of human rights mechanisms through a Human Rights Council, are not enough to guarantee the rule of rights. Accordingly, it seems that the level of commitment to human rights is in deterioration. Although the Secretary General refers to the importance of the legal heritage in human rights, he then says that respect of human rights will preserve our moral and ethical positions and commitments. He asks for consideration of human

19

rights while he does not talk about the need to commit to human rights. Yet, the level of commitment to human rights cannot be merely an ethical issue but should be of legal dimensions, including ratification of the conventions and modification of national laws and regulations to the meet the standards set by the international conventions. Moreover, there is a need to clarify what the report means by human rights in specific, especially that the human rights declaration and conventions include the right to development, the right to security, as well as the right to freedom from hunger, fear, and want. These human rights conventions are legal instruments and not mere ethical and moral commitments. It is inevitable to realize the need for mobilization of political decisions in order to achieve progress on issues of human rights. For example, if we take into consideration the environmental case, it is well known today through accredited research that thermal emissions are of higher urgency and impact on our lives than is terrorism. Also, a healthy and sustainable environment is a right to all. Yet, there is still a lack of a political consensus on environmental issues, reflected in the problems behind the Kyoto protocol. In this context, we ought to wonder who identifies the issues most urgent and in need of political pressure and decisions. If human rights become an ethical rather than legal commitment, then there is a fear that the respect of human rights becomes a trade-off issue between the strong and the weak. The need for a just international law and practical conventions is higher in poor countries where respect of human rights is not a priority, such as is the case in the twenty two Arab countries today. In this regards, it is worth noting a quotation from the elaborators of the convention on the right to development and the convention on solidarity saying “A law for development necessitates the development of the law”. The efforts towards reaching a higher level of commitment to laws and more efficient mechanisms for its implementation remains a necessity left for legal experts and involved civil society organizations.

20

Presentation of Mr. Ziad Baroud In his presentation, Mr. Baroud indicated that; The report represents an answer to all people claiming the failure of the United Nations’ role in preserving security and acting beyond humanitarian relief. The importance of the report is the self-criticism approach it presents of the United Nations’ system. The report considers human rights and human dignity as two aims by themselves. However, the mechanisms to reach these two aims are still problematic and debatable. The “Rule of Law” concept has been used in Lebanon to mean the “State of Law” instead of the “State of Rights”. However, it should be noted that the State of Law is a limited concept that can be flawed and is subject to the nature of the law that could sometimes be used in violations of human rights. On the other hand, the State of Rights is a much more open, objective, and consistent concept since it relies on human rights in the first place. After complete absence of the rule of law in Lebanon during the war, the situation in post war Lebanon still shows deteriorated conditions in this regards. For example, the Lebanese association law that was issued during the Ottoman rule in 1909 is a very relevant and adequate law. However, the implementation of this law in our time reveals inadequate execution, whereby the law is being used to impose control on civil society groups. Given that the Secretary General’s report impacts each of the United Nations member states, it is worth looking at the Lebanese case, specifically at two main events in its history. First, there is the introduction of the Lebanese constitution, which was added to the Taif Peace Accords in 1989, and it stresses that Lebanon is part of the United Nations. This commitment was not reflected until 1997 when the Constitutional Council in Lebanon issued a law on elections of municipalities, which was based on the international Convention of Political and Civic rights. Such steps stressed the commitment to the United Nations Charter and international conventions, and were directly reflected in the Lebanese national laws. In addition, it is worth noting that the establishment of the Constitutional Council in itself reflects a commitment to international law and a reflection of it at the national levels. The report calls upon the United Nations for the adoption of principles of responsibility for protection and security (Paragraph 135 of the report). However, the mechanisms and measures for implementing such a principle and the role of the Security Council in such processes are not clear, especially under the impact of the veto power, double standards, and balances of political powers. In addition, the report talks about the International Criminal Court as well as the international and national laws. Yet, experiences of special courts for Yugoslavia and Rwanda highlight the challenge between international and national laws, which has not been addressed by the report.

21

The report did not tackle human rights in sub-section B under section IV of the report only; however it was tackled through several sections including that on peace, security, and rule of law. In this regards, the proposal to establish a permanent Human Rights’ Council represents a very practical step towards setting more efficient mechanisms for human rights implementation. On issues of democracy, the report stresses the Secretary General’s efforts to make the United Nations activities more coherent and coordinated. This was reflected in linking activities of the United Nations Development Program and the Electoral Assistance Department. Accordingly, the Secretary General recommends that the United Nations should not limit its efforts to setting standards and criteria, but it should move towards supporting its member countries in enhancing internal democratic processes. Here abides a question on the role of the United Nations in protecting citizens against states that refuse to respect the citizens’ rights. It highlights the debates on reforms and democratization in the Arab region and the conflicts between external dynamics and pressures and internal processes. Several developments have been taking place in the Arab region, including the participation of Kuwaiti women in voting, municipality elections in Saudi Arabia, a new constitution in Qatar, as well as the Tunisia declaration on reforms and democracy among others. These steps ought to be supported and internally pushed by the United Nations’ structures. In principle, the report introduces a self-critical approach and alternatives for the betterment of the United Nations role on various interlinked issues. Accordingly, civil society organizations ought to build on this report towards achieving more cooperation and partnership with the United Nations’ agencies.

22

PANEL ON REFORM OF THE UNITED NATIONS: Presentation of Ambassador Riyad Tabbara In his presentation, Ambassador Tabarra indicated that; The reform of the General Secretariat of the United Nations is an essential part of the change in the United Nations’ system. The United Nations represents an essential body to organize international relations, preserve peace and security, and support social and economic development in the third world. The Secretary General’s report talks about the role of United Nations in humanitarian relief and support of peace and security processes. It highlights the push of leading powers, mainly the United States, towards limiting the role of the United Nations in issues of economic and social development, which are highly linked to political decisions and balances of bilateral-state negotiations. The report indicated that the availability of a strong and efficient General Secretariat is essential and vital for the role of the institution. Changing and strengthening the General Secretariat necessitates three main conditions: - The compatibility, commitment, and dedication of the United Nations’

personnel and staffs - The limitation of bureaucratic processes within the institution - The accountability of the staffs

On July 18th 2005, the report “Status of the United Nations Management Reform” was issued. The report discusses the compatibility of senior staffs and highlights that the current process of staff’s selection is not adequate, thus necessitating a new mechanism to be put in place. During the 50’s and 60’s, United Nations staff’s selection took place without any interference from governments, although taking into consideration geographical balances. It was based on the recommendations of high level practitioners in each field, including for example leading economists for staff’s hiring in the economics’ department. Staff numbers did not exceed four thousand. However, nowadays, senior staffs are hired only after a nomination of a specific government. Accordingly, staffs become highly linked to the interests and policies of governments. While one of the conditions for a more efficient General Secretariat is less bureaucratic processes, most of the recommendations in the report “Status of the United Nations Management Reform” call for the formation of staffs monitoring committees. Committees lead to accumulation of bureaucracy whereby staffs spend a bulk of their time answering to the needs of monitoring committees instead of working on the substance of the issues they deal with. The means to reforming the General Secretariat, in the framework of the general reform process of the United Nations, needs a return to the mechanisms used during the fifties and sixties, where staffs’ selection remains independent of states’ interference.

23

OPEN DISCUSSION SESSION:

The discussion session was moderated by Mr. Joseph Farah, coordinator of the Collective of NGOs in Lebanon. Mr. Farah reasserted the importance of collaboration between civil society organizations and the United Nations agencies. He reflected on the significance of the Secretary General’s report in drawing international, regional, as well as national dynamics and relations between the three sectors-government, civil society, and private. Notes by Ambassador George Siam Representative of the Lebanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ambassador Siam reflected on the reform of the United Nations. He noted that the United Nations’ reforms necessitate a reform of the Security Council and the General Assembly as much as a reform for the General Secretariat. He explained that the Secretary General’s report is the result of the struggles led by the United Nations agencies over the years in the various fields it tackled; it is the result of experiences of the United Nations system. Regarding the criteria for choosing United Nations Senior staffs, Ambassador Siam highlighted that the latter ought to have a belief in and commitment to the United Nations system and independency from any national commitments or interests. Accordingly, the role of United Nations staff will be differentiated from staffs of national governments. In addition, equalization between powerful member states and less developed or able countries is a necessity. Hence, double standards could be eliminated and the universal spirit and role of the United Nations can be preserved. This process is essential for enhancing the rule of law and the mechanisms of the United Nations in this regards.

Following, participants’ comments and discussions stressed on the following points;

- Reports such as “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and

Human Rights” enriches the conduct of international processes but have a limited impact on governments. It ought to be stressed that economic and developmental deterioration is due to lack of political decision and will. In this regards, there is a need to look upon the role of civil society and its various groups. This sector should not be handled more than its capacity to deliver. Moreover, the United Nations ought to support civil society through enhancing partnership with its groups.

- The voice and feedback of all social sectors, including the most vulnerable

and impacted groups is vital for the affectivity of the Secretary General’s report that deals with peoples’ dignity. Regarding terrorism, the report ought to address the roots of the problems that lead to the anger of people around the world and not merely the resulting terrorist consequences.

24

- The existence of the United Nations system is not enough to prove its

affectivity. Issues such as the implementation of the United Nations’ resolutions and the right to use the veto should be urgently addressed.

- Synergies and coherence between the World Bank, the International Monetary

Fund and the United Nations agencies ought to be addressed as part of the work on achieving the eighth goal of the MDGs.

- In the age of rapid technological developments and changes, corruption

should be a main issue on the agenda of the international community. There is a need to move from theorizing to implementation and real investment in human resources.

- While the report stresses the role of the United Nations in combating fear,

terrorism, and conflicts, and tries to develop the notion of security, it fails to address issues of human security and the effect of genetic mutilation and neo-technologies that deal with human, animal, and plant genes. The United Nations disregards these new threats to human beings while the private sector is developing agreements in this regards.

- Human rights stemmed from the fact that human beings are rational and free. Yet, most of the support offered to developing countries is through food or money which can often be ineffective in enhancing freedom and rationality among human beings and in the systems they live in.

- There is a need for specific timeframe and practical mechanisms for moving

forward on international environmental commitments. The report talks about a common responsibility in this regards. However, it should be stressed that a common but differential responsibility exists between developed and developing countries.

- Fighting corruption is not limited to developing countries, but should be

addressed in developed countries and inside the United Nations system as well.

- The report ought to address the process of decision-making on the

international scene and answer to the consequences of unilateralism in the case of war on Iraq.

- Democracy issues should be addressed with a complete realization of the

impact of the World Trade Organization, the policies of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and multinational companies that often negates the will of the people.

- Political power and decision is the primary motivators of practical steps

forward. Civil society organizations should enhance their partnership and

25

networking among each others as well as with the United Nations’ agencies in order to put theories and commitment into action.

- In dealing with a proper definition of terrorism, a clear distinction should be

set out for the right to self-determination and to organize resistance against foreign occupation.

- Given the generalization of the MDGs, the Secretary General’s report which

claims to evaluate progress on the MDGs presents a generalized approach as well. It lacks a clear identification of the real reasons behind increasing poverty. It also presents a discriminatory approach that sets out several conditionalities on developing countries in the name of good governance. The report presents very specific and detailed treatment of subjects like rural development but remains very vague and general on hot issues such as terrorism.

- The Arab partnership on small arms was established to work as part of a

global partnership on issues of human security, human rights, and conflict resolution. It is necessary to work towards changing the plan of action set by national states to a convention that all United Nations member states commit to.

- It is necessary to eliminate all reservations on conventions that deal with women’s issues and there is a need to set in place new laws for the protection of the family.

Ending Notes: The organizers of the seminar ended the session by rap-up notes through which they highlighted that the September United Nations Special Session, coinciding as the Millennium +5 Summit, is a highly important opportunity to look back on the progress achieved through the five years since 2000 and to set the basis for work to be done in areas of development, human rights, peace and security, as well as reform of the United Nations in the upcoming period. Given a serious evaluation of the major events on the international scene since the Millennium Declaration in 2000, and the direction in which international relations have developed, the United Nations Secretary General realized the necessity of interlinking the four abovementioned areas in future visions and processes. The report “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights” is based on four main reports including; the report prepared by Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, head of the Millennium Development Project, entitled “Investing in Development; a Practical Plan to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals”, the World Bank’s report entitled “Global Monitoring Report 2005”, the Cardoso report on the United Nations and civil society relations, as well as the report of the United Nations Secretary General’s High Level Panel “A More Secured World: Our Shared Responsibility”.

26

The report takes into consideration the failure to sustain progress and achieve further developments on several commitments resulting from various development summits throughout the nineties. The language of the report and its proposals maintain a moderate approach which takes into consideration the balance of powers in the international system and the propositions that could acquire adoption in the General Assembly. However, the report presents several opportunities to tackle and change issues of concern on the international scene, including development, human rights, peace and security, as well as United Nations role and structure. In this regards, civil society organizations have to take the opportunity for making their voices heard and being part of this process and change. A new civil society call entitled “The Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP)” is currently mobilizing over 1,500 of the most accredited and well known civil society organizations and networks around the world. The call demands political decisions in favor of trade justice, debt cancellation, and a major increase in the quantity and quality of aid. It mobilizes around three main dates in 2005; the G8 Summit in Edinburgh in July, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session in New York in September, and the Sixth Ministerial Meeting of the World Trade Organization in Hong Kong in December. Civil society groups from the Arab region ought to consider being part of such calls and enhancing the space for their voice to be heard.

27

Specific Recommendations on the Reports Items:

Paragraph 10 states that:

“Events in recent years have also led to declining public confidence in the United Nations itself, even if for opposite reasons. For instance, both sides of the debate on the Iraq war feel let down by the Organization — for failing, as one side saw it, to enforce its own resolutions, or as the other side saw it, for not being able to prevent a premature or unnecessary war. Yet most people who criticize the United Nations do so precisely because they think the Organization is vitally important to our world. Declining confidence in the institution is matched by a growing belief in the importance of effective multilateralism”.

This paragraph explains that the credibility of the United Nations was impacted by the war on Iraq, referring it to the inability of the United Nations to implement its resolutions and its inability to stop war. This paragraph lacks any reflection of the debates that took place in the Security Council and does not address the unilateralism of the United States and the United Kingdom in going to war. It should be noted that in the report of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change entitled “A More Secure World; Our Shared responsibility”, paragraph 82 states that:

“Many people assumed that it was quite natural that the United States should seek Security Council support for going to war against Iraq,…… that all Stated should seek Security Council authorization to use force is not a time-honored principle; if this were the case, our faith in it would be much stronger. Our analysis suggests quite the opposite-that what is at stake is relatively new emerging norm, one that is precious but not yet deep-rooted”.

Also, paragraph 83 states that:

“The case of Iraq prompted much difference of opinion. Some contend that the Security Council was ineffective because if could not produce Iraqi compliance with its resolutions. Others argue Security Council irrelevance because the Council did not deter the United States and its coalition partners from waging war. Still others suggest that the refusal of the Security Council to bow to the United States pressure to legitimate the war is proof of its relevance and indispensability….”

These paragraphs give clear realization that the credibility of the Security Council and the United Nations was highly impacted by the unilateralism of the United

28

Nations and its partner coalition in going to war in Iraq and its refusal to abide by the decisions of the Security Council. Moreover, paragraph 40 of the High Level Panel report has indicates that:

“The United Nations and its Member States have discriminated in responding to threats to international security…”.

The report thus noted the contrast in the swiftness of responding to the September 11th attacks on the United States and to the Rwanda genocide. These factors should be given high consideration in the problems facing the credibility of the United Nations.

In the sub-section on ‘national investment and policy priorities’ under section on Freedom from Want, the role of the private sector is over stressed in several parts including the reference made in paragraph 39 and stating that:

“Each national strategy needs to take into account seven broad “clusters” of public investments and policies which directly address the Millennium Development Goals and set the foundation for private sector-led growth”. This subsection addresses as well issues related to gender equality, the environment, rural development, health, promotion of jobs, education, and others.

This could be a step towards limiting the scope of the public sector’s role. Accordingly, it is of high importance to redefine the commitment of the public sector regarding basic services such as education as well as the processes of investing in the human resources.

In paragraphs 55 and 56, the report addresses the issues of trade. A real step forward in this area would necessitate a practical proposal with set timeframe and mechanisms that address the subsidization system of developed countries. In addition, practical steps would be needed regarding the implementation of the agreement on Intellectual Property Rights, quotas, and indicators and standards.

Yet, the United Nations has not provided a clear definition of fair trade and what it stands for in comparison to free trade. Moreover, the report fails to address the issue of global movement of financial assets. According to the latest statistics of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), financial flows reached $400 billion from the South to the North in 2004, while in 1994 the amount was limited to $20 billion.

29


“The entry into force in February 2005 of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is an important step towards dealing with global warming, but it only extends until 2012. The international community must agree on stabilization targets for greenhouse gas concentrations beyond that date.... We must develop a more inclusive international framework beyond 2012, with broader participation by all major emitters and both developed and developing countries, to ensure a concerted globally defined action, including through technological innovation, to mitigate climate change, taking into account the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities”.

Although the report stresses the importance of the Kyoto protocol, it fails to identify the stands from countries that refuse to abide by such international protocols. It also lacks reference to the precautionary principle that was a main debate in the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. Moreover, there is a need for specific timeframe and practical mechanisms for moving forward on international environmental commitments. The report talks about a common responsibility in this regards. However, it should be stressed that a common but differential responsibility exists between developed and developing countries. It ought to be noted that in the report of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change entitled “A More Secure World; Our Shared responsibility”, paragraph 72 clearly refers to the United States refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, thus stating that:

“…the United States which accounts for about one quarter of world emissions of greenhouse gases refuses to ratify the Protocol”.

The paragraph includes as well the following call stating:

“We urge Members States to reflect on the gap between the promise of the Kyoto Protocol and its performance, re-engage on the problem of global warming and begin new negotiations to produce a new long-term strategy for reducing global warming beyond the period covered by the Protocol”.

These statements reflect on practical steps regarding environmental concerns, most notably the Kyoto protocol. The High Level Panel clearly indicates the countries which failed to comply with the international Protocol and the ones which did, while the Secretary General does not deal as seriously with the Kyoto Protocol and environmental issues.

30


“The international financial institutions are essential to ensuring development around the world and successful implementation of the Millennium Development Goals. I encourage them to ensure that the country programmes they support are ambitious enough to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. In addition, these institutions and their shareholders should consider what changes they might undergo in order to better reflect the changes in the world's political economy since 1945. This should be done in the context of the Monterrey Consensus agreement to broaden and strengthen the participation of developing and transition countries in international economic decision-making and norm-setting. The Bretton Woods institutions have already taken some steps to strengthen the voice and participation of developing countries. But more significant steps are needed to overcome the widespread perception among developing countries that they are underrepresented in both bodies, which in turn tends to put their legitimacy in doubt”.

Discussion of future roles for the international financial institutions should be addressed with full realization of the impact of the World Trade Organization, the policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and the control of the multinational companies that often negates the will of the people.


“In our globalized world, the threats we face are interconnected. The rich are vulnerable to the threats that attack the poor and the strong are vulnerable to the weak, as well as vice versa. A nuclear terrorist attack on the United States or Europe would have devastating effects on the whole world. But so would the appearance of a new virulent pandemic disease in a poor country with no effective health-care system”.

This paragraph solely refers to the United States and Europe with no reference or consideration to another countries or regions. Thus, this paragraph needs rewriting to refer to all regions of the world.


“On this interconnectedness of threats we must found a new security consensus, the first article of which must be that all are entitled to freedom from fear, and that whatever threatens one threatens all. Once we understand this, we have no choice but to tackle the whole range of threats. We must respond to HIV/AIDS as robustly as we do

31

to terrorism and to poverty as effectively as we do to proliferation. We must strive just as hard to eliminate the threat of small arms and light weapons as we do to eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, we must address all these threats preventively, acting at a sufficiently early stage with the full range of available instruments.”

This paragraph talks about the need to work towards elimination of small and medium weaponry with the same level of efforts on elimination of weapons of mass destruction. It equalizes between the impact of small and medium weaponry and that of weapons of mass destruction which does not reflect a balanced approach to dealing with the weaponry problem. It is worth noting that the report of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change deals with nuclear, radiological, chemical, and biological weapons in paragraphs 107 till 144, but does not discuss small and medium weaponry. The report includes sections on threats due to each kind of weapons, the needs to meet the challenge of prevention, including better strategies to reduce demands and others to reduce supply and better enforcement capabilities. Accordingly, the High Level Panel report stresses the threats posed by nuclear, radiological, chemical, and biological weapons, which are often possessed by powerful and wealthy countries while not talking about the threats of small and medium weaponry, unlike the Secretary General’s report which equalized between the threats resulting from each.


“Our strategy against terrorism must be comprehensive and should be based on five pillars: it must aim at dissuading people from resorting to terrorism or supporting it; it must deny terrorists access to funds and materials; it must deter States from sponsoring terrorism; it must develop State capacity to defeat terrorism; and it must defend human rights. I urge Member States and civil society organizations everywhere to join in that strategy.”

This paragraph stresses the need to deter states from offering support to terrorist groups. However, it is important to realize that terrorism did not start with the September 11th events. The United States and other countries have supported the Al Qaeda and Taliban groups before 2001, and the international community has the right to know the nature of the relationship that existed between them in that period.

32


“We must convince all those who may be tempted to support terrorism that it is neither an acceptable nor an effective way to advance their cause. But the moral authority of the United Nations and its strength in condemning terrorism have been hampered by the inability of Member States to agree on a comprehensive convention that includes a definitio”.

Here, it is important to stress the vitality and urgency of reaching a clear and well stated definition of terrorism, in which there is a clear reference to the right of people to self-determination and to organize resistance against foreign occupation. Moreover, the report of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change clearly states in paragraph 160 that:

“The search for an agreed definition usually stumbles on two issues; the first is the argument that any definition should included State’s use of armed forces against civilians…..the second objection is that people’s under foreign occupation have a right to resistance and a definition of terrorism should not override this right………”.

The report explains here that:

“The central point is that there is nothing in the fact of occupation that justifies the targeting and killing of civilians”.

This statement supports the urgency for a clear definition of terrorism and a clear standing from the United Nations in regards to people’s right to self determination and the right to organize resistance against occupation which does not attack civilians.


“It is time to set aside debates on so-called “State terrorism”. The use of force by States is already thoroughly regulated under international law. And the right to resist occupation must be understood in its true meaning. It cannot include the right to deliberately kill or maim civilians. I endorse fully the High-level Panel's call for a definition of terrorism, which would make it clear that, in addition to actions already proscribed by existing conventions, any action constitutes terrorism if it is intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a Government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act. I believe this

33

proposal has clear moral force, and I strongly urge world leaders to unite behind it and to conclude a comprehensive convention on terrorism before the end of the sixtieth session of the General Assembly.”

The approach presented in paragraph 91 leads to an inability to take action against states, such as Israel, which still do not abide by these agreements. Moreover, paragraph 91 talks about the need for a clear definition of “the right of people to resist foreign occupation”. Such a definition and distinction from individual terrorism is vital for any progress on tackling terrorism. Here, it is worth questioning whether settlers in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and Golan Heights are legal and legitimate or not. This issue needs a clear answer from the United Nations which still has not provided any stands on this issue.


“I strongly believe that every nation that proclaims the rule of law at home must respect it abroad and that every nation that insists on it abroad must enforce it at home. Indeed, the Millennium Declaration reaffirmed the commitment of all nations to the rule of law as the all-important framework for advancing human security and prosperity. Yet in many places, Governments and individuals continue to violate the rule of law, often without consequences for them but with deadly consequences for the weak and the vulnerable. In other instances, those who make no pretence of being bound by the rule of law, such as armed groups and terrorists, are able to flout it because our peacemaking institutions and compliance mechanisms are weak. The rule of law as a mere concept is not enough. New laws must be put into place, old ones must be put into practice and our institutions must be better equipped to strengthen the rule of law”.

This paragraph discusses the ability of groups that do not abide by the rule of law, including terrorist groups, to overcome the role that international institutions play. Accordingly, the report stresses the need to establish new laws and structures that can deal with such acts and groups. However, the remaining unanswered question is about the actions to be taken against state terrorism, given that many countries such as Israel still do not abide by the United Nations resolutions and undertake illegitimate military actions against the Palestinians and surrounding countries. Moreover, the United States and the United Kingdom went to war against Iraq in spite of the opposition and the decisions of the Security Council and later it was proven that all the arguments presented by the United States to justify the military intervention were falsified.

Given that living in dignity is not a choice and cannot be negotiated and that one can be stopped from living in dignity but cannot be detached from his right to live in dignity, it is recommended that the title of the report’s section on “Freedom to

34

Live in Dignity” ought to be entitled “Enhancing People’s Ability to Live in Dignity”.

In the part tackling human rights issues under section IV “Freedom to Live in Dignity” of the report, the presented approach and proposals, such as the strengthening of the human rights mechanisms through a Human Rights Council, are not enough to guarantee the rule of rights. Accordingly, it seems that the level of commitment to human rights is in deterioration. Although the Secretary General refers to the importance of the legal heritage in human rights- paragraph 129 states that:

“When it comes to laws on the books, no generation has inherited the riches that we have. We are blessed with what amounts to an international bill of human rights, among which are impressive norms to protect the weakest among us, including victims of conflict and persecution”

He then says that respect of human rights will preserve our moral and ethical positions and commitments, explaining in paragraph 140 that:

“Strategies based on the protection of human rights are vital for both our moral standing and the practical effectiveness of our actions”.

The Secretary General asks for consideration of human rights while he does not talk about the need to commit to human rights. Yet, the level of commitment to human rights cannot be merely an ethical issue but should be of legal dimensions, including ratification of the conventions and modification of national laws and regulations accordingly, thus meeting the standards set by the international laws and conventions.


“The International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty and more recently the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, with its 16 members from all around the world, endorsed what they described as an “emerging norm that there is a collective responsibility to protect” (see A/59/565, para. 203). While I am well aware of the sensitivities involved in this issue, I strongly agree with this approach. I believe that we must embrace the responsibility to protect, and, when necessary, we must act on it. ….” and paragraph 139 states “The International Court of Justice lies at the centre of the international system for adjudicating disputes among States. In recent years, the Court's docket has grown significantly and a number of disputes have been settled, but resources remain scarce. There is a need to consider means to strengthen the work of the Court”.

35

The report calls the United Nations for the adoption of principles of responsibility for protection and security. However, the mechanisms and measures for implementing such a principle and the role of the Security Council in such processes are not clear, especially under the impact of the veto power, double standards, and balances of political powers. In addition, the report talks about the International Criminal Court as well as the international and national laws. Yet, experiences of special courts for Yugoslavia and Rwanda highlight the challenge between international and national laws which has not been addressed by the report.

36

Discussion Seminar on the Report of the United Nations Secretary General “In Larger Freedom; Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights”

Agenda of the Seminar

10:00- 10:30 Opening Speeches Dr. Mona Hammam, Resident Coordinator of the United Nations in Lebanon

Mr. Ziad Abdel Samad, Executive Director of the Arab NGO Network for Development

10:25- 10:45 Panel on Freedom from Want Presentation of Dr. Kamal Hamdan, economic expert Presentation of Dr. Youcef El Khalil, economic expert 10:50- 11:10 Panel on Freedom from Fear Presentation of Dr. Georges Kosaifi, economic expert 11:10- 11:30 Coffee Break 11:35- 11:55 Panel on Freedom to Live in Dignity Presentation of Ms. Marie Rose Zalzal, lawyer Presentation of Mr. Ziad Baroud, lawyer 12:00- 12:20 Panel on the Reforms and Strengthening of the United Nations

Presentation of Ambassador Riyad Tabbara, previous ambassador of Lebanon in Washington

12:25- 2:00 Open discussion Moderated by Mr. Joseph Farah, Coordinator of the Collective of NGOs in Lebanon

37

BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES OF THE PANELISTS: Mr. Kamal Hamdan has been the Head of the Economic Division in Consultation & Research Institute in Beirut since 1977. He also serves as an economic analyst in the monthly French Magazine “Le Commerce Du Levant” since 1993. He has been a consultant for several United Nations short missions in Lebanon since 1980. Mr. Hamdan was a member of the Expert Team for the evaluation of the economic conditions in Lebanon and in the Expert Team on privatization in the Lebanese Council of Ministers in 1992. He also served as a consultant to the Lebanese Minister of Economy between 1991 and 1992. Mr. Hamdan taught Micro Economics and Labor Economy in the Lebanese University, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration between 1979 and 1986. He was also the editor in chief of Arab Oil and Gas magazine-Beirut between 1973 and 1975 and an economic analyst in Al-Nahar newspaper between 1972 and 1976. Dr. Youcef El Khalil holds an M.A. in Development Economics from the University of Sussex, Brighton in England and a Ph.D. in Economics, ‘Doctorat Nouveau Régime’ from the ‘Centre d’Etudes et de Recherches sur le Développement International’, Université d’Auvergne, Clermont Ferrand in France. Dr. El Khalil is the senior director of the Financial Operations department at the Lebanese Central Bank (Banque du Liban-BDL) since 1993 and a member of the Open Market Committee of the BDL. He lectures in Development Economics, Managerial Economics, and Agricultural Economics at the American University of Beirut. His professional specialty areas are in Development Economics, Money and Banking, and Managerial Economics. Dr. Georges Kosaifi is a graduate of the Sorbonne University in France with a PhD in Demography. He has thirty years of experience with the United Nations-Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), where he served as the manager of the Human Development Section. He has several publications on labor migration and labor markets, human development and poverty, as well as on Palestinian issues. Dr. Kosaifi has overseen research activities in the areas of manpower development, community development, social impact of macro-economic analysis, human development, poverty eradication, as well as democracy and governance. He also taught in several academic institutions inside and outside Lebanon. Currently, Mr. Kosaifi is the General Manager of Dar At-Tanmiya in Lebanon. Ms. Marie Rose Zalzal holds a Masters degree in Lebanese and French law from Saint Joseph University in Beirut. Since 2000, she has been a member of “Bahithat ", the Lebanese Women Researcher Society. She is also a member of “Hurryat Khassa" for the protection of civil liberties and the association of the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women. Ms. Zalzal is the founding member of C.E.D.A.R association for the protection of environment 1982 – 1983, and a member of the commission of Human Rights at the lawyers bar association in Beirut in 1991. Between 1983 and 1999, Ms. Zalzal was the General Secretary of the movement towards secularism.

38

Mr. Ziad Baroud is the Secretary-general of the Lebanese Association for Democratic Elections. He is a court lawyer and member of the Beirut Bar Association. Mr. Baroud is a lecturer at the Saint Joseph University on public law and education law and consultant for the United Nations Development Program on local governance and decentralization. Ambassador Riyad Tabbara has a Ph.D. in economics from Vanderbilt University in the United States. He has held several positions with the United Nations in New York, Africa, Tunisia, and Lebanon. Mr. Tabbara served as the ambassador of Lebanon to the United States between 1994 and 1997. He coordinated the Group of Experts at the Permanent National Population Committee of Lebanon between 1998 and 2004 and was the senior UN advisor to the Syrian Government on combating unemployment between October 2002 and 2003. Between 2001 and 2004, he was the advisor to the Prime Minister of Lebanon on International Affairs. Ambassador Tabbara has given lectures or series of lectures, on Population and/or economic development in various universities and presented solicited papers or organized sessions at meetings of various professional societies. He was also the president of the Arab Demographers Association between 1984 and1986.

front page-executive summary - undp...3 panel on freedom from fear in the second panel, dr. georges...

Documents