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