H. L. D. Mahindapala

New revelations made by a top UN official about the corrupt practices in the core administration of the UN confirm that under Ban Ki-Moon the UN is sliding from bad to worse.

According to Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services, Inga-Britt Ahlehius, the internal auditor fighting corruption within the UN, has stated categorically that it is ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-in the process of decayƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. She emphasized this when she said:: ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ “I regret to say that the Secretariat is now in a process of decay. It is not only falling apart … it is drifting into irrelevance.”

Last year Norway’s then-U.N. Ambassador Mona Juul issued an unusually blistering attack on Ban last year in which she accused him of weak leadership, lack of charisma and angry outbursts, in an internal memo leaked to Norwegian news media, says an AP report. (June 20, 2009)

These are damning indictments of Ban Ki-MoonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s regime at the UN.

Ms. AhlehiusƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s office was set up in 1994 to investigate, audit and inspect the internal administration to prevent corruption and abuses within the UN system. Instead of strengthening her hand to carry out her duties Ban Ki-Moon has obstructed her work and ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-have taken other steps, such as trying to set up a competing investigations unit, that undermined her tenure.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ (AP ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…”June 20, 2009)

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ IsnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t Ban Ki-Moon giving the same treatment to Sri Lanka? First, he entered into an agreement with the President of Sri Lanka to initiate an inquiry into alleged human rights violations, particularly during the last months of the Vadukoddai War launched by the Tamil political class/caste in May, 1976. President Rajapakse honours the agreement by appointing a Commission on Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Ban Ki-Moon made it crystal clear, both in the agreement he signed with the President and later in his own press release that it was the responsibility and the duty of Sri Lanka to inquire into the issues raised by him first before anyone else. . Having done that, he goes back to his seat on the 38^th floor of the UN in New York and appoints a three-man panel to do the same work.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ This undercuts the agreement he had with President Rajapakse. Quite correctly, in keeping with international norms, the first choice was given to President Rajapakse for him to conduct a national inquiry. External agencies can step in only if member states are either unwilling or incapable of handling issues related to human rights violations. Sri Lanka, according to the agreement signed with Ban Ki-Moon, readily showed its willingness and a capability to handle its internal concerns. So what made Ban Ki-Moon go back on his word, and, contrary to his own contractual agreement, appoints a parallel inquiry ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” clearly a move that is against his own expressed requirements? IsnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t this like him appointing a rival auditing unit under his control undermining the legitimate authority of Ms. Ahlehius?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Ms. Ahlehius states that Ban Ki-Moon has appointed ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-a competing investigation unitƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ to undermine her tenure. Well, if he can appoint a competing unit to undermine his own Under Secretary -General should anyone be surprised when he appoints a competing unit, on top of the existing Sri Lankan Commission on Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation — ostensibly to ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-adviseƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ him on Sri Lankan issues?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ DoesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t this arbitrary and random appointing of inquiries, here, there and everywhere, one competing with the other, question his competence to be the Chief Administrative Officer of the UN? There does not seem to be any method in his madness. What does he hope to achieve by appointing parallel units of investigations other than trouble? At the end of the day there will be two reports on his desk ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” both originating from inquiries approved by him. Which one is he going to accept for any future action? If both inquiries agree on the conclusions then that will be a feather in his cap. But the aggressive way he has locked horns with Sri Lanka and the known hostility towards Sri Lanka of some members of the three-man panel indicate that the UN report is going to be predictably anti-Sri Lanka. Where does this leave him and Sri Lanka? How does he propose to proceed with two conflicting reports on the same issue? WonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t he be stuck in between a rock and a hard place. Is that what he wants?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In appointing two investigating units when only one is required he shows all the signs of someone who does not know whether he is coming or going. If he knew how to handle his job he wold not be in this position. His ill-conceived tactic of running parallel units of investigations has backfired on him, revealing his incapacity to deal with the internal and external issues confronting him. If he is capable of clear, objective and rational decision-making without caving into pressures ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” and his job is one that is overloaded with pressures ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” he could clear his name and save the UN from sinking into a black hole.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ But his decision-making process ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” aided and abetted by politicking and partisan aides in his inner cabinet ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” is making him look like a doomed creature thrashing around helplessly in the great Biblical Flood without a NoahƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s Arc to rescue him. All signs are that he is heading for extinction.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Going by the subtext in Ms. AhleliusƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ statement he also seems to be a control-freak. The appointment of a rival investigating unit in the UN when Ms. Ahlehius was heading one already, can be interpreted as a sign of paranoia. In other words, he wants reports to cover his back and not independent reports that might expose his incompetence and inability to handle basic global and internal issues in the UN. The conclusion that can be drawn from Ms. AhleliusƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s statement is that the lackluster leadership of Ban Ki-Moon is doomed to drag the UN to its lowest depths. Unsure of himself he has gone into the habit of appointing two inquiries ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” one that is likely to produce independent reports and the other appointed by him to produce reports that would protect his back.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ All these add up to confirm Ms. AhleliusƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ conclusion that the UN is becoming ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-irrelevantƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦and decaying.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ In addition his incompetence and growing accusation of internal corrupt and sex abuses are fast eroding the integrity and credibility of the UN. The responsibility for this decline lies entirely with Ban Ki-MoonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s self-centered policies to protect his own back more than serving the overall interests of the UN. If he continues to bungle like this the UN will turn into a victim of its own mismanagement.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ If Ban Ki-Moon hopes to be a good manager of global affairs ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” and also the UN ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” then he canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t be pandering to all and sundry, or keep on duplicating inquiries that will not take him anywhere. Take the case of Sri Lanka. He canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t be pleasing I/NGOs, Navi Pillay, Louise Arbour, the CEO of International Crisis Group, Radhika Coomaraswamy and that loud-mouth pipsqueak at the UN, Mathew Russell Lee of the Inner City Press and also member states like Sri Lanka. It is impossible for him to appoint a panel to please these anti-Sri Lankan agents at the UN ignoring the contract he signed with President of Sri Lanka which gave him the exclusive right to appoint an internal investigation first. Before rushing in to appoint a second panel the prudent course of action would have been for him to wait till the findings of the Sri Lankan Commission of inquiry were revealed. But Ban Ki-Moon normal conduct has consistently revealed all the traits of those who rush into places where angels fear to tread.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Of course, finally it is predictable that he will accept the report of the UN three-man panel which is under his direct control, mainly because it will be written to suit his political agenda. Then what is he going to do with the Sri Lankan report? In any case, which report will have more credibility? Is it the report of his panel operating on twitterings, e-mailings, and other second-hand and even concocted reports, supplied mainly by the anti-Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora which is already mobilizing their forces to bombard the three UN panelists with accusations against the Sri Lankan forces, or on the first hand findings of the Sri Lankan panel investigating the ground realities? For instance, will it consider the Channel 4 video on killings with no known place, date or persons to corroborate the incidents depicted? This indicates how Ban Ki-Moon is sinking deeper into a black hole of his own making.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Ban Ki-Moon is also expected to use his powers evenly, without surrendering to big power brokers ruling global politics. Accordingly, he is expected to hold inquiries into allegations of violations of international humanitarian law irrespective of which power/s are involved. A critical test of his competence in handling global affairs would be to compare the way UN has handled Sri Lanka with that of Israel.

He is coming under heavy fire on this issue too. Naseer H. Aruri, chancellor professor (Emeritus) at the University of Massachusetts in Dartmouth, told IPS that the proposed international commission “may never see the light of day if recent experience is to prove valid.”

ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that, behind the scenes, Palestinian officials had faced threats that Israel would retaliate by inflicting enormous damage on the beleaguered Palestinian economy.

ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-The same accusations would have been launched against the Palestinian Authority had it not agreed to postpone the discussion of the Goldstone report in the U.N. Human Rights Council.

ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-The flagrant violations of international law by IsraelƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s armed forces against civilians resulted in similar policy responses from U.S. Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. “Both excused Israel, shielded Israel from international scrutiny, and permitted Israel to once again get away with impunity,” said Aruri.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-In October last year, Israel, the U.S. and western allies succeeded in “postponing” indefinitely the referral of the Goldstone report on the Israeli onslaught on Gaza to the U.N. Human Rights Council for discussion, he said.

In an analysis of the developing situation in Israel Thalif Deen of the IPS reports that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-there are no signs of the proposed “prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation.”

After an earlier devastating three-week Israeli military offensive against Gaza in late 2008 – which left more than 1,400 people dead and over 5,000 injured – the Human Rights Council in Geneva appointed a three member fact- finding mission, led by Judge Richard Goldstone.

That panel submitted a blistering report accusing both Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes.

Norman Finkelstein, a scholar and political scientist, told IPS that after publication of the Goldstone report, Israeli leaders complained that the report was making it difficult for Israel to launch another war.

“Unfortunately, Ban Ki-moon did not implement the recommendations of the Goldstone report [to pursue war crimes charges], but instead has prolonged the proceedings,” he added. “Now he is procrastinating on the formation of a committee to investigate Israeli crimes on the Mavi Marmara [the Turkish ship attacked by Israeli military forces].”

The outcome is easily foreseeable, said Finkelstein, author of several books, including ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”This Time We Went Too Far: Truth and Consequences of the Gaza InvasionƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢.

Israel is now preparing for an attack on Lebanon, he warned. “It will be an assault next to which previous ones pale by comparison. And it is because Ban Ki-moon has been delinquent in his responsibilities that Israel will be able to launch this monstrous attack,” he predicted.

When the death and destruction come in Lebanon, Ban should be held culpable, said Finkelstein.

“The secretary-general is obviously under pressure from the United States and other Western states not to conduct an international probe unless he has the concurrence of Israel,” says one diplomatic source.

“If the Israelis do agree,” he told IPS, “which I very much doubt, it will be a watered down investigation, not a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”full investigationƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ the Security Council agreed on.”

Last month an Israeli-appointed self-investigating panel absolved the military forces of any criminality in the flotilla attack.

Richard Falk, professor of international law emeritus at Princeton University, told IPS: “It seems abundantly clear the Government of Israel is hostile to international criticisms, or to any effort to assess contested Israeli behaviour by way of a U.N. initiative.”

Falk said Israel refused to cooperate with the Goldstone fact-finding mission, and then defamed Goldstone and repudiated the report once released – despite scrupulous efforts to produce a balanced assessment of alleged violations of humanitarian law by both Israelis and Palestinians.

“The failure so far by Ban Ki Moon to appoint forthwith such an investigative panel contrasts with the response to a similar call in relation to investigate allegations of Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s criminality in suppressing the Tamil insurgency,” said Falk, currently U.N. special rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Considering his bungling and his inability to learn even from his past mistakes do we need him as the Secretary General for a second term? A more pertinent question is to ask whether it is in the interest of global peace and stability for him to remain in that seat any longer. ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚