Circus UN and Sustainable Development

The decision to allow Zimbabwe to chair the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) is not only laughable, but continues to chip away at the credibility of the UN as an effective world body. It would be somewhat similar to appointing Rwanda to a key role in UNHCR back in the early 1990s, or North Korea a role in the IAEA. In broad detail, the relevant UN website cites the following broad goals for the CSD:

• "Integration of the social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development in policy-making at international, regional and national levels;

• Wide-spread adoption of an integrated, cross-sectoral and broadly participatory approach to sustainable development;

• Measurable progress in the implementation of the goals and targets of the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation."

These are all important goals, for all nations - it is strange then that the country with perhaps the most unsustainable economy gets to lead this body for a while. And before I forget, I wonder when some other African nations will have the courage to stand up and condemn a regime which has been nothing short of a disaster.

Blog Laws

There is a great article that discusses how law applies to bloggers. It really is worth reading (not that I live in the US at present).

Excerpt from Austin Bay's Blog Part 2

Austin wrote this one back in late 2004 on his blog and at Strategy Page and is as follows:

A new greatest generation is emerging -- in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in the other, less-publicized battlegrounds of the War on Terror.

Focused on the U.S. political cycle, America's press elites are missing the extraordinary story of the 19-through-35 year olds who are winning this war. The detailed history of this new cohort of American and Free World leaders -- the people who will shape the 21st century -- is being written by themselves, chiefly on the Internet, via email or web logs.

This is a battle-honed bunch with exceptional talent and motivation, young people with a mature balance of idealism and realism, youthful cool and professional competence. I saw this cool and competence on every patrol and convoy I made this past summer in Iraq. I had the privilege of working with these "kids," inevitably chastising myself for referring to such able young adults as kids. Their comeback was always "It's OK, sir. We know colonels are old."

Sam, a U.S. Army private first class from Milwaukee, is an example of young soldiers who are both "boots and geeks" -- troops who can handle digital technology and rifles. The non-classified laptop is on the blink? Sam taps out a half-dozen commands, and the machine functions smoothly. Need to run the eight kilometers of iffy freeway between Baghdad International Airport and downtown? Sam pulls up in an SUV, his M-16 propped so that he can drive and shoot. Sam goes through the pre-trip procedures calmly, carefully. If we "meet trouble" and can't drive through the ambush -- and Sam is very good at high-speed swerves, I'm talking NASCAR level -- he'll take the best firing position available and try to suppress the attackers. Cool? He does this every day.

I know Sam has several gripes with "the system" -- every real soldier earns the right to gripe. But in four months, I never saw a gripe deter this young man from doing his job right.

Then there's James. He's a captain in the Australian Army (note, I said "Free World leaders"). He's 27, with a law degree but more importantly, on-the-ground experience. His has a special talent for seeing the "big picture" -- strategic assessment. Every night the analytic group he organized would meet in Al Faw Palace to discuss the day's events, with particular emphasis on economic and political issues affecting Iraqi governance.

James' "Chess Club" consisted of lieutenants, captains, majors and a handful of young enlisted troops, with a couple of old fogies allowed to kibitz. From the discussion, James would produce four or five concise PowerPoint slides. He usually finished his chore around 2 a.m., when he emailed the slides worldwide. By 9 a.m. the next morning, there's James, back in the office, with a huge cup of coffee, starting the process again.

James' "product" actually attracted a large readership. One day we got a complaint (from headquarters, Supreme Allied Commander Europe) that "the interesting slides SACEUR likes to see" hadn't arrived in email.

Australia, James said one morning, was America's most reliable military ally in the 20th century, and those shared values extend into the 21st century. "This fight is about freedom, sir," James said. "Though it is an extremely complex fight, with economic development and governance lines of operation pursued simultaneously with the security (warfighting) operation."

"Yes," I said. "And it's going to be men and women like you, James, who will fight it for at least the next decade."

He replied with a sober nod.

As a senior officer told me the day before I left Baghdad: "You've gotten to see what I see, Austin. These young people are so smart."

"Where do they come from?" I asked him.

"I don't know. Many were in the service before 9-11, but a lot of the young enlisted people, they've come in since then."

"Maybe it's the pressure, circumstances," I said. "You know, terrible challenges, the old saw of rising to the occasion?"

We both looked at each other. No doubt that is the case -- but the challenges these young people meet day in and day out are so dangerous and daunting.

Excerpt from Austin Bay's Blog Part 1

Now that I have my own blog, I thought I should post a couple of articles here that came from a good friends blog. Austin Bay and I served together in Iraq back in 2004 with the US Army III Corps (from Ft Hood). Here is an article that I wrote for him back in August 2005:

“Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on that strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The Statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events. Antiquated War Offices, weak, incompetent or arrogant Commanders, untrustworthy allies, hostile neutrals, malignant Fortune, ugly surprises, awful miscalculations – all take their seat at the Council Board on the morrow of a declaration of war. Always remember, however sure you are that you can easily win, that there would not be a war if the other man did not think he also had a chance.”

I recently read the first volume of Winston Churchill’s fine memoirs and was struck by the above comment. In light of recent experiences not only in Iraq, but in a range of theatres where I and/or my friends have served, the above statement rings true. Looking past the fact that Winston Churchill was a great statesman who stood up to the great evils of Hitler, as a young man, he served in a range of conflicts at the behest of Queen and Country – a man who had seen the face of war in all of its terrible splendour and sadness.

One of the great tragedies of operations that the US, Australia and their allies have been on, as well as operations led by the UN, has been an unwillingness to stay the course. The politicians who stand up for principles and seek to thwart those who do humanity an injustice run a great risk – they live in democratic countries and sometimes the domestic political cost can be too high. Deploying to Somalia, East Timor, Afghanistan and certainly Iraq means hardship and sacrifice, but the causes are just. While it is obvious that some government leaders do not acknowledge the real cost of operations, we must recognize that they cannot unless they wish to commit political suicide.

Domestic constituencies are fickle and tragically their judgments are based on erroneous media hype – the ‘a bomb has gone off in Baghdad, obviously the Coalition is loosing.’ What is good for a media outlet rarely coincides with the truth – those awfully boring, mundane facts such as new schools being built, agricultural initiatives, public utilities for all Iraqis. Oh and did I miss that the new government of Iraq represents all the facets of ethnic and religious components of Iraq. Overseas deployments, particularly when including massive reconstruction programs, are incredibly expensive and need long-term commitments. I can remember one visit to Sadr City in Baghdad where I met a real hero – an Iraqi who was rebuilding his 23rd school after years of neglect by Saddam. His partner in this most noble enterprise was murdered by the enemy. That is, the enemy of the Iraqi nation, not just us.

War is noble and nasty – and hard. In the case of Iraq, who can dare argue against removing an evil dictator? It was never going to be easily despite what some suggested. To depart now would be to fail the Iraq people and the memory of all of those young men and women who have paid the ultimate sacrifice from our nations.

I support the ideals of the UN – an international body to be responsible for international peace and security. As it has generally (and sadly) displayed incompetence at that, we should be relieved that other countries step up to the challenge. The history of the UN is replete with examples of failure and cowardice. How can anyone who values their own human rights denigrate those who are willing to take a stand to protect such rights? The deaths of millions in Cambodia, Rwanda, Somalia, Former Yugoslavia and other locations should loom large for any that suggest that the US and her allies have no right to intervene in another country. Notice that the last sentence didn’t include Kosovo – it might have if the US, UK and others had not acted out of principle as opposed to the strictures of a bankrupt international body. Oops sorry- we meant the UN is dealing with Saddam so lets not get rid of him. He didn’t really mean to gas all of those Kurdish people. And the Shi’as were never persecuted either. And all those poor Iraqis are not getting any food or medicine because of UN sanctions, but isn’t that a nice marble palace you are building Saddam. How fantastic that you only have thirty of them. At least you won’t have to now see all the raw sewerage that flows freely through the streets of Baghdad.

The anti-war pundits in the US, and certainly in Australia, forget that by not supporting the Coalition, they lend de facto support to the enemy. This is not some noble hero fighting against an evil empire, Luke Skywalker style. This is an enemy that is happy to kill Shi’a schoolchildren in Basra, kill unemployed Iraqis looking for jobs in the Iraqi Police, destroy income sources for the nation and plunge Iraq into some sick jihaddist fantasy where human rights don’t rate a mention. Do we need another reason to stay the course?

Australia's Budget 2007 and Federalism

This week is perhaps the pinnacle of the annual parliamentary calendar seeing the Treasurer deliver the annual budget for the nation , followed up two days later by a somewhat ficticious response by the Opposition leader. Undeniably, the last decade of Liberal government has seen a return to economic responsibility with the removal of 100 billion dollars worth of government debt, continued surpluses, low inflation, unemployment and so on. There are a number of elements of the budget which I think are disappointing (low ICT spending being a key one), but in general the budget again highlights the strong credentials of the Government.

Quite a lot of the budget (and budget response) centred around education. I continue to find it somewhat bizarre that the Opposition sees that the Federal Government is responsible for the failings within the education system. I think that both the Government and Opposition see that the current education system has many failings - but rather than blaming the Federal Government, a lot of the fault needs to lie with state governments.

The concept of state governments was certainly valid back in the late 19th century when Australia comprised of several semi-autonomous colonies. However, it is now somewhat anachronistic and highly inefficient to have this multiplicity of state-based education systems that are frankly below par with other countries. Accepting that primary and secondary education is poor in Australia needs to be linked to seeing that the key responsibility for these institutions lies with state governments, not the Commonwealth. If blame is to be seen to fall on the Commonwealth Government, then it is fair for the Commonwealth to take responsibility for these institutions. Interesting, the issue of revising the federal-state divide is one that has much bipartisan support. Of course, getting an electorate to appreciate this would be another matter - ah, the joys of democracy...