Ebou,

I agree that the U.S has been less than friendly towards the U.N, and is
always reluctant to join any associations that are predicated on an equal
footing with other nations  because they like to wag their super power
muscle. They have done a variety of things  including  refusal to pay their
dues etc, and all of it was geared towards having control over decisions made
by the U.N body in one form or another.
I am also aware of Annan's limitations on this Job, and infact, a member of
the L sent me an interesting email in which she also raised the same point.

 However, I still maintain that personalities can bring about positive
changes even in the face of surmountable odds, and Annan's influence is
absolutely critical at this juncture, especially where Africa is concerned,
even if it just an expression of his opinion, and some effort towards
levelling the playing field for all member countries.

I mentioned in my initial post that, up to this point, Africa's problems in
terms of wars, human disasters and even genocide,  have not been  seen as
urgent and important as far as the U.N body is concerned, and this has been
quite evident in how they have responded to impending disaster on the
continent, as opposed to how they have responded to the same issues in other
countries.

The fact that intervention  troop's, dispatch, funding etc depends very much
on the political and personal agenda of the respective countries providing
their services, and the fact that the African countries seem to get the short
end of the stick in terms of response to our crises, is in itself enough
reason for Annan to draw attention to this very issue and thereby bring it to
the forefront. Again,in  the private email  I received, the writer mentions
an interesting point that the position of Secretary General of the U.N is
almost always given to people from developing countries for a purpose,
because the position has very limited powers, and the occupier of it cannot
make a move without the premission of the super powers. Sadly, I agree with
her, but I also maintain that perhaps it is time to change that ideology, and
I do hope that the time is now.
It is something that cannot be just ignored, and while the position of the
Secretary general of the U.N is one that requires diplomacy in how issues are
approached, they nevertheless have to be approached, unless the countries
whose problems   are seen as non priortity are satisfied with that approach
to things. I will be very dissappointed if Kofi Annan in all his years at
this organization has not had the same view, and all indications seem to be
that he is very much aware of these issues I raise here.

The news media here in the U.S this evening reports that infact, Africa and
the view that her problems seem to take a back seat at the U.N were the main
items of discussion at the millenium summit these past couple of days.

Of course, Africa cannot afford to also just sit by  like children, as we
tend to do many times, and leave our fate in the hands of others. It is
Africa's business to make sure that we are not taken for granted, and that
involves conducting our affairs in a manner that will demand respect.
Needless to say, having leaders like Yaya Jammeh who embarrasses us both at
home and abroad in every aspect will not earn us this respect at all.It must
be said that if we want equal footing among other nations, then we must show
that we can take care of our own as others do.This is essential, otherwise
any efforts made towards putting us on a level playing field amongst our
peers would have been in vain.

Someone told me of an interview  with Annan that was conducted by the BBC
World Service on Tuesday, and it is worth checking since in that interview,
as mentioned by this individual, Annan does talk about his limitations in
this office, and his frustrations with those limitations especially where
Africa and her problems are concerned.

Jabou Joh


My good Sister Jabou and brother Yus,

 I totally agree with you all. Yet you have to also realize that the
 Secretary General serves at the pleasure of the permanent members of
 Security Council of which the US is preponderant. This situation is by
 design only, considering the evolution of the UN since the League of Nations
 after the WWI.  US foreign policy has ever been weary of any form of
 "entangling treaties and alliances" in any form, in fact this US "paranoia"
 prevented the US from being a member of the League which ironically was the
 very brainchild of the US president then Woodrow Wilson. So you see the US
 has ever been uncomfortable with UN.
 Yes Japan is an economic power, but not a permanent member of the the
 Security Council, and has very little political clout. The Security Council
 sets the global agenda through the instruments of their individual veto
 powers and collective resolutions.  The secretary general is just an
 administrative caretaker after all.  No matter how well he means or grand
 his intentions, he has to be ultimately very pragmatic and prudent in the
 choices he makes!
 Yus, your question is a genuine one- why shouldn't Mr. Annan use his
 position to promote African issues- Honestly I see why not...! as long as he
 is prudent about it.  Recently he has been scaring the hell out of Jesse
 Helms and a lot of other Western powers but I believe his success in
 whatever his intentions are shall depend alot on the political goodwill of
 the US.

 Greetings

 Ebou
 _________ >>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface
----------------------------------------------------------------------------