The United States of America wants the United Nations totally restructured along the Jesse Helms concept of the UN. A much weaker and smaller organization and one which needs to go to the Private Sector for funds, if indeed it will be able to survive at all. We find that fascinating since the transnationals and private sector are indeed the single greatest benefactor of everything the United Nations has accomplished over the past 51 years...namely the SAFETY and SECURITY established in countries around the world where those businesses operate. Just look at the agreements, treaties and resolutions all countries of the UN have participated in over the UN's 51 years. Who is kidding who?

If anything, big business should pay for the UN. They are the benefactors. And we don't believe the United Nations should be reduced or the budget cut at this time. Repeat: The budget should be increased, not cut! However, we support the reorganization for efficiency and effectiveness geared to the changing world demands.

It is a know concept of organizations that they are a function of strategy. Strategy is not a function of organization. It is very clear that the world is changing rapidly and impacting the United Nations. This should dictate a change to their strategy, which in turn would dictate a change in the organization structure, if need be. However, as Secretary-General Kofi Annan said only a couple of days ago - July 16, 1997, he will set up a Strategic Planning unit at the UN. Since the UN does not have a Strategic Plan...it will have trouble deciding what needs to be done to the organization structure. This makes it easier for outside pressure to steer the direction of the UN.

Is the USA winning?

More and more we are beginning to see the large corporations around the UN, usually in quiet side meetings. They call it "Civil Society Partnerships" and include a token NGO or two, but you rarely see any NGOs there. The UN realizes the following facts:

• The UN is being told, and restructured, to be a "development organization" and has been criticized for their lack of effectiveness at this in the past. The UNs budget should be around $3 billion but currently is at about $2 billion (negative) in the arrears, thanks mainly to the USA and a few others.
• The World Bank who was not very active around the UN over the past fifty years (they are a Washington DC based operation) has over the past couple of years become visible and active at the UN New York. They tout a budget of around $50 billion dollars mainly corporate infrastructure projects called "Structural Adjustments."
• The transnationals/financials invested this past year around $235 billion globally in direct country infrastructure investments and it might be added that if you check the UNDP Human Development Report (just out for 1997) you will see basically only 12 countries of the 185 at the UN saw any of the funds. Note: China got $52 billion, twice number two on the list (Mexico). Poor Russia got a little over $3 billion. And the USA got the cuts congress is proud of. (This represents Corporations-to-Country investments.)
• Wall Street moves $2 Trillion dollars every single day according to the top official of the US Treasury department that monitors Wall Street. And the lead article in the UNDP award winning magazine "Choices", July 1997, "Money Matters to Marshall Carter, So Does the Developing World" shows clearly just how willing the top financial organizations are willing to move money out of the developed world to wherever the recipients are willing to comply with their conditions.
• A quick check of only the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and the London Financial Times on a weekly basis will show corporations buying one another all over the globe at around $5 billion to $200 billion every week! Great consolidation of wealth and power, wonderfully delineated in Forbes magazines weekly issues. Also the UNDPs "Human Development Report 1997" already mentioned. (This represents Corporations-to-Corporation investments.)
• Pick any single one of the largest transnationals and they are economically bigger than most of the 185 governments at the UN combined together.
• ... And all of the above is only the tip of the iceberg.

Now whether you think this is bad or good, we think it is good and bad. First, it is good that some of the developing countries will finally get the development investments they need. Then, its bad in that many won't! It is good that the door has been opened for all countries of the world to participate in economic development (if they comply). It is bad if we turn the process of government over to the corporations to govern us. See UN Partnerships.

The reform process at the UN has opened many eyes of the people. We now ask; Are we governed by the people for the people or by the corporations for the corporations? The answer is becoming blurred to some and clear to others. We now wonder if the downsizing of the governments, their lack of money, their lack of social responsibility, interesting campaign funding policies, the Washington DC Corporate lobbying structure, their (governments) lack of power to make commitments (see any of the UN meetings over the past year, RIO+5 etc, etc) that benefit the people, simply means the NGOs of the world will have to switch their focus from the governments to the corporations in the near future?

The more important questions might be; Are the corporations the ideal compassionate (people interested) group we want to partner with? or, Should we keep a clear separation between the NGOs and the private sector? If not, choosing carefully your partners may be a wise decision. Note: the trend of the private sector to set up its own NGOs (see the UNDP article referenced above). We hope they are not mean spirited and full of cupidity.

Dr. Larry Gell
United Nations

New York

Dear Dr. Gell:

Fax # 212-697-2363

I am writing you in connection with the video tape that you took of the event held on October 16, 1997 in celebration of the "International Day of Older Persons" at the Dag Hammarsjkold Auditorium, UN headquarters.

You may know that our NGO was the organization that put together the program for that afternoon in collaboration with JASA ( Jewish Association for Services for the Aged), which Presented its Chorale Group of Senior Citizens. All the performances were received with raving applause since they presented songs and dance from many countries and cultural backgrounds attuned to the universal principles of the U.N.

Mrs. Rita McCullough, NGO Committee on Aging' has been in touch with you ever since that day about getting copies of the video tape you took on the occasion and, during these last three months, has conveyed to me your response by saying that you had indicated having other priorities, but also promising that you would make copies available to her very soon so that the participating artists could purchase them at a nominal price. The last such message came to me a few days before Christmas.

However, yesterday Mrs. McCullough let me know that you had told her that your video machine had just come back from the repair shop the day of the event and that you had taken it for granted that it was in good working condition. It seems that only now you have discovered that it had not, and from Mrs. McCullough comment, I understand that you cannot deliver the tape to us, but that you could put some of its pieces together into one tape for us.

Let me tell you that this bad news has been very shocking to us, particularly coming after three months of the event and because we were not allowed to bring our own camcorder to video tape the proceedings due to the fact that the "UN people would do it for us".

Please know that after so many promises to Mrs. McCullough' which she kindly conveyed to us, we feel terribly unhappy to hear that there is no video tape now. After the wonderful experience of that day, this really comes as very frustrating blow for all of us.

For save facing purposes before the performers and their coordinating organizations would you possibly be in a position to follow up on your suggestion and put together the pieces you have in some form or shape into one tape so that, at least, we can share it with the artists.

Please let us hear from you as soon as possible concerning this matter. Your kind cooperation will be highly appreciated.

Very truly yours

Dr. Rosa Perla Resnick
Representative to the U.N. -

c.c. Mrs. Helen Hamlin, Chairperson' NGO Committee on Aging, Mrs. Rita McCullough, NGO Committee on Aging

I guess with that kind of attitude it is easy for them (and the other corporations) to turn their backs on the Welfare children, and easily cut $50 to $60 billion dollars over night in the USA. They have dumped 10s of millions of workers in the USA and just last month turned their backs on the 6 million loyal Chinese workers of Hong Kong. PS: We believe China has the capacity to rise above the Wests short-sighted current global strategy on this particular issue.

The US Government brought all the living Presidents and other dignitaries to Philadelphia, PA (City of Brotherly Love) a few months back, to tell the people there that they are not "entitled" to IT! (IT, is whatever you might ask for.) Instead, they suggested everyone pitch in and solve your own problems. They apologized that it cost around $200 million dollars to bring them all there to deliver this message. Couldn't they have used the internet? Their own "Superhighway" of the world? And sent some money instead!

Well, you can see it is a changing world and the NGOs will have to think through their own strategy, reengineer, restructure, reorganize, and form strategic alliances of their own ... if we are ever going to get FAIR sustainable development in the "New World Economic Order" well on its way ("Stay the course, a thousand points of light..."). The question of just who is the Civil Society? And the disturbing trend of the Corporations to set up their own NGOs.

We will have a lot more to say about this, but meanwhile you can follow the actions being taken by the UN on Reform.

You might also look at the section on Corporate Responsibility and Accountability on this site. Thanks to sONY this part of the site should get more attention in the future.

---

Back to top of Page

---

---

Please contact the Webmaster with comments and suggestions.

---

© Copyright 2000 ngos.net. All rights reserved.

---

To return to the ngos.net Home Page at any time,
just click on the icon at the bottom of each page.