www.truthout.com
Reaction of Senator Patrick Leahy to UN Ambassador John Bolton's Bid to Strike "Respect for Nature" from Draft UN Statement of Principles
t r u t h o u t | Statement
Friday 26 August 2005
News Item: (Excerpt from an article today, Friday, August 26, in The Washington Post.)
"The Bush Administration, whose pro-business policies on climate
change have long rankled environmentalists and UN delegates, has done it again. The United States is pressing to scrap a proposal to have world leaders gathering in New York next month express 'respect for nature.'
"That phrase was included in a draft statement of principles to be
agreed to by 175 heads of state and government attending a Sept. 14 United Nations summit on poverty and UN reform. The statement invited leaders to embrace a set of 'core values' that unite the international community, including respect for human rights, freedom, equality, tolerance, multilateralism and respect for nature.
"The offending phrase would place no fresh legal or financial burdens on US taxpayers, but the Bush Administration voiced concern that it would distract attention from the main goal: reforming the United Nations."
Statement of Senator Leahy:
"It didn't take long for Ambassador Bolton to find ways to further
erode our leadership in the world and our standing as a moral
authority. In his tantrum over this straightforward reference to the
environment, Ambassador Bolton does not speak for most Americans, and I count myself among them.
"We are blessed with a planet that sustains life and the comforts we enjoy, but in so many crucial ways we are destroying the delicate fabric of life that supports us. The phrase that Ambassador Bolton finds offensive is an understated reference to some of the most urgent challenges we face, and they are challenges that we can't handle by ourselves. We need cooperation from other nations. US and world opinion are far ahead of ideologues like Ambassador Bolton in recognizing that far more needs to be done to improve our stewardship of the environment, which today is under siege on every continent - from pollution and over-fishing of the oceans, to the destruction of forests and of wildlife biodiversity; and from the lack of potable water, to the pollution of our water sources by poor sanitation and industrial waste. The world has been slow to rise to these challenges, and acknowledging them at least is a first step.
"This is clearly a time for the Bush Administration to step in with
the adult supervision they hinted that John Bolton would be getting
as our UN representative."
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), a leader on environmental policy in
the Senate, is also the ranking member of the Senate appropriations panel that handles the Senate's work in writing the annual budget bill for the State Department, including the US contribution to the UN. Leahy is a member of the US delegation to the UN during the current session, nominated last year by President Bush and unanimously confirmed by the Senate.
Reaction of Senator Patrick Leahy to UN Ambassador John Bolton's Bid to Strike "Respect for Nature" from Draft UN Statement of Principles
t r u t h o u t | Statement
Friday 26 August 2005
News Item: (Excerpt from an article today, Friday, August 26, in The Washington Post.)
"The Bush Administration, whose pro-business policies on climate
change have long rankled environmentalists and UN delegates, has done it again. The United States is pressing to scrap a proposal to have world leaders gathering in New York next month express 'respect for nature.'
"That phrase was included in a draft statement of principles to be
agreed to by 175 heads of state and government attending a Sept. 14 United Nations summit on poverty and UN reform. The statement invited leaders to embrace a set of 'core values' that unite the international community, including respect for human rights, freedom, equality, tolerance, multilateralism and respect for nature.
"The offending phrase would place no fresh legal or financial burdens on US taxpayers, but the Bush Administration voiced concern that it would distract attention from the main goal: reforming the United Nations."
Statement of Senator Leahy:
"It didn't take long for Ambassador Bolton to find ways to further
erode our leadership in the world and our standing as a moral
authority. In his tantrum over this straightforward reference to the
environment, Ambassador Bolton does not speak for most Americans, and I count myself among them.
"We are blessed with a planet that sustains life and the comforts we enjoy, but in so many crucial ways we are destroying the delicate fabric of life that supports us. The phrase that Ambassador Bolton finds offensive is an understated reference to some of the most urgent challenges we face, and they are challenges that we can't handle by ourselves. We need cooperation from other nations. US and world opinion are far ahead of ideologues like Ambassador Bolton in recognizing that far more needs to be done to improve our stewardship of the environment, which today is under siege on every continent - from pollution and over-fishing of the oceans, to the destruction of forests and of wildlife biodiversity; and from the lack of potable water, to the pollution of our water sources by poor sanitation and industrial waste. The world has been slow to rise to these challenges, and acknowledging them at least is a first step.
"This is clearly a time for the Bush Administration to step in with
the adult supervision they hinted that John Bolton would be getting
as our UN representative."
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), a leader on environmental policy in
the Senate, is also the ranking member of the Senate appropriations panel that handles the Senate's work in writing the annual budget bill for the State Department, including the US contribution to the UN. Leahy is a member of the US delegation to the UN during the current session, nominated last year by President Bush and unanimously confirmed by the Senate.
Comments
Hide the following comment
And world poverty
28.08.2005 15:40
Scrap the ideals, Bolton tells UN
27.08.05
By David Usborne
America's controversial new ambassador to the United Nations is seeking to shred an agreement on strengthening the world body and fighting poverty intended to be the highlight of a 60th anniversary summit next month.
In an extraordinary intervention, United States appointee John Bolton has sought to roll back proposed UN commitments on aid to developing countries, combating global warming and nuclear disarmament.
Ambassador Bolton has demanded no fewer than 750 amendments to the blueprint restating the ideals of the international body, originally drafted by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
The amendments are spelled out in a 32-page US version, littered with deletions and exclusions. Most strikingly, the changes eliminate all specific reference to the so-called Millennium Development Goals, accepted by all countries at the last major UN summit in 2000.
The Americans are also seeking to remove virtually all references to the Kyoto Treaty and the battle against global warming.
They are striking out mention of the disputed International Criminal Court and drawing a red line through any suggestion that the nuclear powers should dismantle their arsenals.
Instead, they are seeking to add emphasis to passages on fighting terrorism and spreading democracy.
Very quickly, Bolton has given the answer to anyone still wondering whether his long and difficult journey to New York - President George W. Bush confirmed him to the post after the US Senate was unable to - would render him coy or cautious.
He seems intent on taking the UN by the collar and saying plainly to its face what America expects - and does not expect - from it.
To the dismay of many other delegations, the US has even gone so far as to score out pledges in the text that would have asked nations to "achieve the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product for official development assistance by no later than 2015". Passages on a larger role for the General Assembly are gone. A pledge to create a standing military capacity for UN peacekeeping is rejected.
This show of contempt from Washington and its new envoy comes when Annan has been severely weakened by allegations of corruption, fraud and nepotism.
The White House is aware that Annan could be further undermined when investigators into corruption in the oil-for-food programme in Iraq issue their final report, probably just days before the summit, due to run September 14-16.
The move by Bolton has thrown preparations for the summit into turmoil, prompting some to question whether there will be anything for leaders to put their pens to.
"We can't be entirely surely there will be an agreement," one senior UN aide admitted yesterday.
Failure to reach an agreement could embarrass British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who is believed to have given broad backing to Annan's original draft.
"It is not great news," said one Western diplomat about the US paper, which had been distributed only to a select group of UN ambassadors by yesterday. "What they are proposing is quite radical. If we start negotiating now the way the Americans want, it is going to make for a very difficult process."
The President of the General Assembly, Jean Ping of Gambia, must now try to save the summit from disaster. He will bring together a core group of 20-30 countries in the days ahead to see if the American objections can be overcome.
MS