Opinion
Analysis
Questionable if reforms can
save United Nations
The United Nations is facing its worst
crisis since its start, almost 60 years ago. The confidence for the world
organization is at a record low and decreasing. The UN is accused of both being
inactive and riddled with corruption. Its relations with the US are shaky.
When the world is witnessing the genocide in Darfur, the UN is not there. When
the Security Council cannot agree on Iraq, the US chooses to go its own way in a
war the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan later condemns as illegitimate.
Therefore, it is not invalid to question if the UN is capable of dealing with
its main tasks – to work for peace and uphold collective security.
Kofi Annan has realized the problem. One year ago he tried to install a crisis
consciousness among the 191 member states in the General Assembly. He emphasized
that something has to be done, that the UN had reached a crossroad: “a moment
just as important as the founding of the UN in 1945.”
Kofi appointed a commission of 16 highly regarded members led by the former Thai
Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun. This week the commission is presenting a
report with suggestions on reforms to strengthen the organisation.
The report will focus on an expansion of the Security Council, making it more
representative and reflect the current global power structure. Many would agree
that at present, the US, China, Russia, France and Britain are privileged
permanent members with the right to veto, representing a relic from the time
after the Second World War. Other important countries like Germany, Japan,
Brazil and India have to be given a greater say.
The sour aftermath of the conflict in the Security Council in the run up to the
Iraq war is making a necessary unification on UN’s peace keeping missions
difficult. Even if the US now wants UN’s help in Iraq, the recent conflict has
hardened the relations between Washington and the UN headquarters in New York.
The possible corruption scandal that is currently being investigated gives fuel
to UN-critical voices in the US. Several billion dollars is said to have
disappeared in the humanitarian oil for food programme that UN conducted between
1996 and 2003. The UN is being accused of lacking transparency and the
organisation is slow in its internal investigations.
The prospects of a stronger UN, acting to balance the power of the US are hard
to find. As the only superpower, the US is too strong.
When UN’s problems are now being discussed in public, one can question if the
fundamental work by the UN –to prevent war – has ever become a reality.
Its work has been hampered several times. The UN sanctioned Kuwait war against
Iraq in 1991 was seen as a success of international cooperation after the end of
the Cold War. But then there were the fiasco with the humanitarian intervention
in Somalia and the passivity during the genocide in Rwanda. These examples point
to UN’s limitations.
The question is if the coming report can give UN a fresh start. If unity would
materialize on important issues, the confidence would increase and the
accusations of irrelevance would die down. But there are may hurdles on the way.
The present system is outdated and does not work to satisfaction. To allow all
countries, big and small, democracies and dictatorships to have one vote is
problematic. What is needed is a new organisation that can unite the world’s
democracies for cooperation and action.
Kili Stars need hard work, not
luck
As the East African soccer body announced
the new fixtures for the East African Senior Challenge Cup that starts December
11, preparations of Tanzanian representatives Kili Stars are yet to begin in
earnest with a week before the kick-off.
The Challenge Cup takes place exactly ten years after Tanzania clinched the last
title in Nairobi, Kenya in 1994.
Historically, number four is our lucky number in the Challenge Cup as proven by
four decades of Tanzanian participation in East Africa’s biggest soccer event.
We had the Gossage Cup in 1964 and ten years later in 1974 we clinched the
Challenge Cup in Dar es Salaam and 20 years later, in 1994, Nairobi was the last
venue of our glory.
We can consider the year 2004 ours too, but the the poor preparation of our team
makes it difficult for that dream to be fulfilled since it is too obvious that
we cannot match our neighbours, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Burundi and Zanzibar, who
traditionally take their sports quite seriously.
Close to making the Ethiopian mission too close to impossible, Kilimanjaro Stars
(Tanzania Mainland team) is in Group A, which soccer enthusiasts say, is the
group of death and opens its campaign against the Isles national team, Mapinduzi
Stars, December 13.
Even if Kilimanjaro Stars do qualify to play in the semi-final, the team will
meet either Kenya, Uganda or Sudan and past record has it that we have never
managed to beat any of the three teams.
The team’s coach Raymond Simkoko needs to offer his players psychological
motivation apart from the usual physical and tactical training if he seriously
wants his team to excel in the Championship.
We request TFF to set aside internal squabble for a while and concentrate on the
team’s training.
TFF bosses, Chairman Muhidini Ndolanga and his Secretary Michael Wambura, should
understand that the success of the national soccer teams in international
assignments will guarantee their long stay in their posts, therefore, much
attention must be paid to the team and not election as they are doing now.
Focus on refugee problem welcomed
By Evarist Kagaruki
The inclusion (understandably at the insistence of Tanzania and
Kenya) of the environment and refugee treatment in the preamble to the Dar es
Salaam Declaration adopted and signed by the leaders of the Great Lakes Region
during their recent summit on the region’s future peace and security prospects,
was very appropriate. The two issues (environment and refugees) are not only
interrelated, but also bear a huge impact on the socio-economic development of
the two countries.
In Tanzania, environmental destruction caused by refugees from neighbouring
countries of Rwanda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo, has been
catastrophic! In Kagera and Kigoma regions for example, the impact of hosting
refugees can be felt just by a mere glance at the desert-looking landscape which
was once green land! Vegetation there has been decimated. So the country’s
concerns over the issue are very real and legitimate.
That Kenya is equally concerned about the environment even as it elates to the
refugee problem is not surprising. The country has been playing host to refugees
from neighbouring Somalia. Their impact on the environment can not be
underestimated. But, perhaps more importantly, the country, under the Narc
government of President Mwai Kibaki, seems to be generally very keen on
environmental issues, which distances it from the previous administration which
had a bad reputation of pursuing a policy of land-grabbing accompanied by
deforestation.
Kenya, as a member of the East African Community, would certainly be happy to
see the whole Great Lakes Region evolve round environmental policies which would
facilitate the region’s integrated economic development.
Tanzania’s concern over the problem of refugees are also understandable. While
the Great Lakes Region has the largest number of refugees in Africa, Tanzania,
which is listed as one of the world’s poorest countries, has for decades hosted
one of the world’s largest refugee population – a very heavy burden indeed! This
burden is in terms of economic, social and – as we have already mentioned –
environmental costs/losses, some of which will never be recouped.
In economic terms, national resources have been overstretched to accommodate
huge numbers of refugees in their settlements. Refugees, like the citizenry,
need sufficient supplies of food, clothing, shelter and access to basic
education and health care. They deserve reasonable care and maintenance.
Like most host governments, the Tanzanian Government has, of course, relied
heavily on international aid to cope with the refugees’ survival needs, as
afore-mentioned. However, since the break up of the Soviet Union, and
subsequently the disastrous disintegration of the Balkans, the eyes of the rich
donor nations of the North have turned more towards migration from the East,
rather than in the South! So, Tanzania automatically found itself shouldering a
heavier burden of maintaining the refugees than had been the case previously.
This increased the strain on the local resources.
Socially, the refuge problem in this country, as in any other, manifest itself
in several ways. Refugees are normally confined to settlement camps. For that
reason they can not be a source to the host economy. For almost their entire
life in the camps, they have to share with the citizens some of the scarce
social facilities otherwise meant for the latter. This often generates social
tensions and some kind of resentment and an hostile attitude from the local
communities who begrudge the non-productive refugees’ free utilisation of
services funded from their (the local people’s) taxes!
Moreover, camp environment is characterised by grinding poverty, idleness,
helplessness, despair and the absence of recognisable lawful authority. The
consequence of this has been that the camps eventually turned into breeding
ground for violence, banditry and terrorism. The rising level of crime in the
country in recent years is attributable to armed refugees who have infiltrated
villages, towns and cities.
It is against this background that Tanzanian public’s enthusiasm, sympathy and
sentimental response that initially greeted the refugees’ arrival seem to have
changed into fatigue and antipathy. Many Tanzanians now would wish that all the
refugees returned home. This attitude is unfortunately anti-Tanzanian!