Harper at the UN

[big bad john]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/09/21/harper-un.html

'We can not afford to fail' in Afghanistan, Harper warns UN
Last Updated Thu, 21 Sep 2006 13:46:50 EDT
CBC News
The success of the mission in Afghanistan is vital to the health and future of the United Nations, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Thursday in his first address to the world body.

"If we fail the Afghan people, we will be failing ourselves," Harper said in defending the NATO mission, which includes more than 2,000 Canadian troops among 20,000 from 37 countries.

The mission has come under increasing criticism both in Canada and abroad, but Harper told the UN that the Afghan mission is "Canada's biggest and most important overseas engagement."

"Our collective will and credibility are being judged. We cannot afford to fail. We will succeed."

Harper spoke at the opening session of the UN General Assembly debate in New York, his first address to the world body since becoming prime minister in January.

The 15-minute speech — the time limit allotted to each of the UN's 192 members — was aimed at boosting Canadian support for the mission, which has claimed the lives of 36 soldiers and one diplomat since it started in early 2002.

The mission was started by the previous Liberal government and extended to 2009 by Harper's Conservatives in the spring.

But as the death toll mounts, Harper's government has faced increasing pressure over the mission, including opposition calls to bring the troops home before 2009 and accusations that Canada is taking part in a U.S.-led war.

The democratically elected government of Afghanistan requested UN help, Harper told the United Nations, stressing the international nature of the mission.

At least 19 UN agencies are working in Afghanistan, along with the NATO troops and U.S. forces.

Harper outlined a number of upcoming "tests" on which the UN would be judged, including:

Helping stabilize Haiti.
Addressing the humanitarian crisis in Darfur in western Sudan.
Ensuring peace along the Lebanon-Israel border.
Clamping down on the spread of nuclear proliferation.
He challenged the United Nations to make sure the new Human Rights Council places human rights above "political manoeuvring" and that it doesn't meet the fate of its "failed predecessor organization."

The old UN Human Rights Commission was criticized for allowing some of the world's worst human rights abusers to sit as members, including Libya, Cuba and Zimbabwe.

Harper also criticized the pace of management reform at the UN, laid out by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan earlier this year. Canada's government has been given a mandate to become more accountable, he said, adding that the UN should follow suit.

"The taxpayers of member nations … make significant financial contributions to this organization," said Harper.

"They have the right to expect stronger, more independent oversight mechanisms, more robust accountability for how funds are spent, and human resources practices that are based on merit."

 

[Mike Baker]

Good speech IMO.

 

[couchcommander]

The speech was fine enough, but that man really needs to work on his delivery.

 

[James]

Good speech IMO.

I missed it, but I like what I've been reading.

 

[Lost_Warrior]

I heard it on the radio today.  He did very well.  I liked the way he emphasized that this mission was mandated by the UN.  So many people that I know who don't support the war say it's because we are only there following the US, and that we should be following the UN instead.  This should help quell some of the misconceptions a lot of the nay sayers have about this mission.

 

[Kirkhill]

The speech was fine enough, but that man really needs to work on his delivery.

Insufficient zip? Fire? Oratorical vigour?  ;D

How do you turn an accountant into Winston Churchill in one easy lesson?  Heck,  FDR's level would be an improvement.

The sentiment was right as was the tone but, as you say, the delivery...... Oh well.  He's still better than the alternatives.

 

[GAP]

He was at the UN, speaking to the UN...anyone want to bet within the next little while the speach gets quoted as having been made to the US....anyone? didn't think so...

 

[boondocksaint]

good speech

could have used the word 'tripe' to bring it up a notch though

 

[big bad john]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060921.wtext0921/BNStory/Front

Text of Harper's speech
Canadian Press

The prepared text of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's address to the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday:

Mr. Secretary General,

Mr. President,

Distinguished Delegates,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is an honour for me, as prime minister of Canada, to speak to you today about the important issues confronting us as members of the United Nations.

The United Nations was born from a combination of the essential needs of nations for stability and security and the higher ideals to which we all should aspire — freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

Our responsibilities in this organization are as varied as they are important and I cannot mention them all or do each the justice it deserves.

Nor can Canada be effective by diffusing our efforts across all of these matters. We must focus our considerable but limited resources where we can make a real difference.

So let me turn to one particular and key area where global interest and higher purpose come directly together: the mission in Afghanistan.

The United Nations recognized shortly after the attacks of September 11th, 2001, that the Taliban regime, by its promotion of terrorism, was a threat to international peace and security.

Kofi Annan, our distinguished secretary general, whom we thank for his 10 years of loyal service, summed up in a few words the reason why we must combat terrorism.

Terrorism, he said, “is a direct attack on the core values the United Nations stands for: the rule of law, the protection of civilians, mutual respect between people of different faiths and cultures, and peaceful resolution of conflict.”

That is why we in the United Nations have the responsibility to defeat terrorism. That is why, with unity and determination, the United Nations undertook its responsibility and its role in Afghanistan. And that is why Canada, which lost 24 of its own citizens on 9-11, answered the call.

And there we are. The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan is the UN's single largest special political mission.

It is also, by far, Canada's biggest and most important overseas engagement. So the UN's mission is Canada's mission.

No fewer than 19 UN agencies are in Afghanistan. They are working tirelessly to help the Afghan people and their national government shake off the perpetrators of terrorism and build a democratic and secure society.

At the same time, approximately 20,000 troops from 37 countries — roughly 2,500 Canadians included — are contributing to military efforts to help stabilize Afghanistan and eliminate the remnants of the Taliban regime once and for all.

All our actions in Afghanistan — civilian and military — are being taken in accordance with the mandate of the United Nations Security Council.

In short, we all stand together with the democratically elected government of Afghanistan under the banner of the organization that represents our collective will.

Let us be realistic. The challenges facing Afghanistan are enormous. There will be no quick fixes.

Moreover, success cannot be assured by military means alone. This we all recognize. For success also requires a strong and unwavering civilian contribution: educators, engineers, elections advisors; direct aid and technical assistance. The list is lengthy, but the contributions essential.

That is why Canada is engaged in work like the rebuilding of girls' schools, ripped down and destroyed by the Taliban in their frenzy of hate.

That is why this spring we increased our development assistance, raising Canada's total contribution to nearly $1 billion over 10 years, to assist the people of Afghanistan.

These two actions — rebuilding a shattered society and providing a stable security environment — go hand in glove.

And we are making progress — of that there is no doubt — five million refugees repatriated; over five

million children enrolled in primary schools; 10 million Afghans registered to vote in successive democratic elections.

More than one-quarter of the seats in Afghanistan's legislature are now held by women — remarkable in a nation where a few short years ago girls could not attend school and women had no human rights of any kind.

The success of this mission, in providing both security and development, is vital to the safety, livelihood and very future of the Afghan people — but it is also vital to the health and future of this organization.

Let us recall that the democratically elected government of Afghanistan — led by President Karzai — requested the assistance of the United Nations and its member states in the struggle against terror, intimidation, violence and oppression.

We have responded. But we haven't made Afghanistan's progress irreversible. Not yet.

Canadian defence personnel, diplomats, and development officers are on the front lines of the fight for the future of Afghanistan. Canadians feel tremendous pride in the leadership role they have assumed and we share equal grief for the casualties they have taken.

We are therefore acutely aware that the United Nations' job in Afghanistan is not done. We have no illusions about the difficulties that still lie before us.

Difficulties don't daunt us. But lack of common purpose and will in this body would.

After all, if we fail the Afghan people, we will be failing ourselves. For this is the United Nations' strongest mission and, therefore, our greatest test. Our collective will and credibility are being judged. We cannot afford to fail. We will succeed.

The United Nations is also facing other challenges.

In Haiti, for example.

Canada has played an important role in this country, dispatching troops, police and development officers to support UN activities aimed at restoring stability and establishing democracy. And we are offering this country $100 million in economic development assistance.

However, we must act together to ensure that our multinational force paves the way for stability and progress, and empowers the government of Haiti to help its citizens, the poorest in the Western Hemisphere.

Darfur too is a significant challenge — as multinational security efforts are transferred from the African Union to the United Nations. It is also a test of the principle that this body endorsed last year — the responsibility to protect.

The United Nations has authorized a mission there with a robust mandate. But will the government of Sudan accept it?

In the Middle East, Canada has joined the international community in the reconstruction of Lebanon. But will UNIFIL ensure security on Israel's northern border and lead to progress in the Middle East peace process?

Nuclear proliferation threatens us all. Are we prepared to ensure that Security Council decisions will be implemented fully? Will we act to halt activities that have no reasonable purpose other than the acquisition of nuclear weapons?

These are some of the tests the whole world must face. And there are other challenges internal to this organization.

Will the new Human Rights Council become a forum where human rights are genuinely put above

political manoeuvring? Or will it emulate the fate of its failed predecessor organization?

But I must tell you, the early signals suggest that too little has changed, that the page has not yet been turned.

And what will be done to make progress on UN management reform?

Earlier this year, Canada's new government was given a mandate to make our national government more accountable, to ensure taxpayers get full value for their money, and to pursue a clear, focused agenda that produces tangible results.

The United Nations should accept nothing less. This organization must become more accountable and more effective. Management reform must continue, and at an accelerated pace.

The taxpayers of member nations, Canadians among them, make significant financial contributions to this organization. They have the right to expect stronger, more independent oversight mechanisms, more robust accountability for how funds are spent, and human resources practices that are based on merit.

I have just described the tests by which this organization will be judged.

Canada wants this to be a positive judgment.

We were there when the United Nations was founded. Like the other countries, we were motivated by a pressing need to establish a new international consensus in a world devastated by war.

And like the others, we were motivated by our own pragmatic interests and noble aspirations for all of humanity.

More than 60 years later, the formula remains the same.

The challenge has always been to bring nations together to build a better world by forging consensus on common purposes, and by finding the political will to translate these into action.

When these goals have been achieved, Canada has always been with you — through the war against fascism, the Cold War, dozens of UN-sponsored peacekeeping missions, and more recent multinational military engagements in the Balkans and the Persian Gulf.

Today, Afghanistan leads the list of challenges that we face collectively — peace-building in a nation where there is not yet peace, and where progress requires a wide range of capabilities undertaken by a wide array of our member-states.

My earnest hope is that we will say with pride to future generations of leaders: we, the United Nations, took up that responsibility in Afghanistan, rose to the challenge, and met it firmly, collectively, successfully.

In this endeavour, as with the others I have outlined, Canada will be there with you at every step along the way.

Thank you.

 

[Shec]

FWIW I thought he sounded pretty good, a no-nonsense pragmatic message that told it like it is.  Bland in that stereotypical Canadian way perhaps but nevertheless lucid and coherent when compared to Kofi Annan's swan song, Ahminejhoweverthehellyouspellit's certifiably psychotic hate-mongering,  Chavez's "badges, I don't wear no stinking badges"  Yankee Go Home incitement, and Bush's usual articulate delivery that makes one think that he got a degree in speech therapy by mailing in Captain Crunch cereal boxtops.

Maybe Layton should read it again, reflecting on it this time,  before he makes any more knee-jerk reactionary comments about how it is shameful that as lackeys of American imperialism our military spending exceeds humanitarian and development aid spending by a ratio of 9:1.

 

[Kirkhill]

I agree Harper did better than Ahmedinejad and Chavez.  Are they the current gold standard? 

 

[Reccesoldier]

I really like the way the MSM is playing up the "Harper didn't talk about X,Y and Z" when he begins his speech by saying he is not going to talk about X, Y, and Z.

I can see the headlines now if he had... "HARPER ALL OVER THE MAP IN SPEECH TO UN"

:mg: Perhaps the comment about the top ten floors of the UN being useless could be applied to the CBC building ?  :mg:

 

[MarkOttawa]

Layton? Read (at least recently)? Oxymoronic.
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/007618.html

I have read (can't remember where) that his PhD thesis was, shall we say, slim.
http://www.ndp.ca/bio/

"Layton went on to study foreign investment and public policy at York University, earning a PhD in 1984. He would go on to teach at three universities, most recently as adjunct professor at the University of Toronto’s Department of Geography."

Actually his thesis was titled ‘How To Run Entire Countries With A Caucus Of Less Than 20 MPs.’
http://www.richardcleaver.com/?p=235

With 29 one might well be afraid, very afraid.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Lost_Warrior]

"Layton went on to study foreign investment and public policy at York University, earning a PhD in 1984. He would go on to teach at three universities, most recently as adjunct professor at the University of Toronto’s Department of Geography."

And by night, he was known as "The Video Professor!"

 

[MarkOttawa]

At last the media mention a key fact, of which I am sure 95% of Canadians are unaware since our media has not bothered to inform them of this trifling detail:

CBC:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/09/21/harper-un.html

'"If we fail the Afghan people, we will be failing ourselves," Harper said in defending the UN-sanctioned, NATO-led mission, which includes more than 2,000 Canadian troops.'

CTV:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060920/harper_UN_060921/20060921?hub=TopStories

'Currently, there are about 20,000 UN-sanctioned troops in Afghanistan, mostly taking part in peacekeeping and rebuilding in the north and west.'

More here:

"UN Security Council wants NATO ISAF strengthened"
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2006/09/un-security-council-wants-nato-isaf.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Lost_Warrior]

At last the media mention a key fact, of which I am sure 95% of Canadians are unaware since our media has not bothered to inform them of this trifling detail:

+1

Like I said, most people I know who do not support this mission had no idea it was mandated by the UN.  They all pretty much thought we followed Bush into the country unilaterally like when Bush went into Iraq.

 

[GAP]

To be honest guys, it was Chretian's way of getting out of going to Iraq...a nice safe "peacekeeping" mission in Kabul. Almost worked, until we started to care.

 

[Magravan]

I liked it, actually. In my eyes, it is making headway in not letting the other voices drown out the reasons that we are asking our citizens to go fight a war in another country. I didn't hear him read it (which may have been a blessing... His presentations, as previously mentioned, are not very good), but the words themselves are enough to show that he hasn't buried his head in the sand when it comes to telling people why we are fighting.

 

[onecat]

+1

Like I said, most people I know who do not support this mission had no idea it was mandated by the UN.  They all pretty much thought we followed Bush into the country unilaterally like when Bush went into Iraq.

I'm sure those are the people who think that harper, because he's conservative and from out is a pawn in all of Bush's game.  If those people actually bothered to read and look into things they would know better.  This a UN mission set up by the Liberal party.  to believe otherwise is burying your head in the sand.

 

[RangerRay]

Gawd, it is so nice to have a coherent leader running this country for a change...