2011 09 UNANZ Newsletter

UNANZ NEWS SEPTEMBER 2011 ISSUE N°2

UNANZ NEWS

ISSN 1179-8009 (PRINT) ISSN 1179-8017 (ONLINE)

CALL FOR THE REVITALISATION

OF THE WORLD’S PREMIER

ORGANISATION P3

MAKING A DIFFERENCE:

THE ROLE OF

SMALL STATES

AT THE

UNITED NATIONS P13

BOOK LAUNCH:

THE PACIFIC – RESILIENT

AND REMEMBERED P17

CELEBRATING THE

UN INTERNATIONAL YEAR

OF COOPERATIVES 2012 P19


THE PEOPLE‟S MOVEMENT FOR THE UNITED NATIONS 2 UNANZ.ORG.NZ

UNANZ News

Contents

In this Issue

Call for the revitalisation of the world‟s premier organisation 3

Terrence O‟Brien

Making a difference: The role of small states at the United

Nations 13

Jim McLay

Book Launch: The Pacific – Resilient and Remembered 17

Lachlan Mackay

Celebrating the UN International Year of Cooperatives 2012 19

Ramsey Margolis

President‟s Column 22

Michael Powles

Branch Reports:

Northern: Auckland: A Peace City 24

Laurie Ross

Waikato: Model UN 25

Mano Manoharan

Tauranga: Three Model UNs 26

Gray Southon

Wellington: Winter seminar series 27

Robin Halliday

Report from the UN Youth Conference, Adelaide 30

Byron Terris

UN Youth Update 31

Elizabeth Chan

UNANZ NATIONAL CONFERENCE 2011

EDITION

September

20 September

International Day of Peace. Panel discussion on building a

culture of peace in the Pacific. Includes music, dance and

refreshments. Free entry. Turnbull House, 11 Bowen St

5 – 7 pm, Wellington

30 September

Wanganui Branch Junior MUN to be held at Wanganui Girl‟s

College.

Wanganui

October

17 October

International Day for the Eradication of Poverty.

18 October

National Office UN Day Function.

James Cook Grand Chancellor, 5:30pm – 7:30pm

Please contact [email protected] for more information.

Wellington

28 October

Wanganui Branch UN Day event. Annual Dinner, Venue TBA.

National President, Michael Powles to speak on “UNANZ and

its future”

Wanganui

September - December 2011

Upcoming Events



Terence O’Brien calls for a

revitalisation of the world’s

premier multilateral

organisation.

It is hard today to ignore the

fact that the United Nations

faces a crisis of relevance. The

emergence in 2008 of a new

top table assembly of states,

the G20 Summit – (comprising

the leading twenty global

economies) – signifies some

disillusionment in several high

places with the existing system

of international relations,

embodied in the United

Nations and other established

international agencies. The

G20 summit is still in its

infancy and so far consensus is

proving sometimes a problem,

but its arrival signals

potentially the most significant

shift in the architecture of

global co-operation in the 20

or more years since the Cold

War ended. Its very

composition reflects above all

ongoing change in the world

order driven by the emergence

of a number of notably

successful economies from the

ranks of developing countries,

whose accomplishments and

potential entitle them now to a

far more substantive role in

global affairs.

Collective, co-operative

international behaviour

between sovereign states – in

other words multilateralism –

represents one of the supreme

inventions of 20th century

diplomacy. Nothing like it had

been witnessed in preceding

times. Its creation owed much

to American vision and energy.

Today multilateralism operates

at several levels – regionally

and globally – and across

several different although

connected domains (such as

politics, security, finance, trade

and economic development),

but at its centre stands the

United Nations as the sole

CALL FOR THE

REVITALISATION OF THE

WORLD’S PREMIER

ORGANISATION

TERENCE O’BRIEN

Speaker for the United Nations Association of

New Zealand Wellington Branch AGM, 2011.

23 March 2011

The United Nations faces a crisis of relevance. The emerging role of the G20 summit signals

potentially a most significant shift in the architecture of global co-operation. For New Zealand

this is problematic. The UN system has long been the principal window through which New

Zealand has been viewed by the world. It is important that the system of global multilateralism

reflected in the United Nations is rehabilitated. New Zealand has a strong interest in the

continued centrality of a universal forum where convergence of interests and values can be

promoted and where diversity can be understood and respected.

The United Nations faces a crisis of relevance. The emerging role of the G20 summit signals

potentially a most significant shift in the architecture of global co-operation. For New Zealand

this is problematic. The UN system has long been the principal window through which New

Zealand has been viewed by the world, It is important that the system of global multilateralism



universal institution grounded

in a charter accepted by all its

members. This constitutes the

vital core for the multilateral

system and provides essential

legitimacy to that system as

well as for each individual

member state and their

involvement therefore in

international affairs. For

smaller countries with limited

diplomatic reach and minimal

leverage when acting alone,

the value of a system that

allows coalitions of interest

with like-minded across an

extensive range of institutions

and issues adds materially to

diplomatic capacity for

promoting and protecting

interests. It provides, too, the

opportunity to cultivate

international reputation. The

assistance from beyond New

Zealand to our recovery from

the grave crisis of the

Christchurch earthquake

eloquently underlines the value

of reputation in an inter-

connected world. At the most

basic level, the relevance of

the UN system to this country

is that it is the principal

window through which most

governments in the world view

New Zealand.

The forces of modern

globalisation have energised

the flow of people, ideas,

money, services and

merchandise across borders.

They have also diffused power

in ways that require a much

more sophisticated

understanding of how it

actually works in the world

today. We shall come back to

that. All of this has collapsed

time and distance. It has

deepened and widened inter-

dependence amongst nations,

increased opportunity, as well

as interconnected many risks

and challenges. Climate

change and energy security is

one good example. The vital

need to nourish predictability

and good order in this dynamic

global setting means the rule of

international law is paramount.

The essence of the UN system,

which is to instil rules-based

international behaviour and to

embrace the interconnections

between multiple challenges,

remains fundamental to such

good order. The recent New

Zealand defence white paper

characterises rules-based

international order that

respects national sovereignty

as an enduring New Zealand

national security interest. This

will, presumably, be reflected

in the first ever NZ National

Security Policy currently under

preparation by the

Government. It needs as well

to find ongoing expression in

the teaching discipline of

strategic security studies now

in its adolescence at NZ

universities.

Vital Issues

The debate about how best to

rehabilitate global



multilateralism – in other

words to improve governance

of the UN and other

institutions of the international

system – is increasingly

framed today as a trade-off

between legitimacy and

effectiveness. Whereas it is

conceded the UN may indeed

possess essential properties of

legitimacy, it is argued in the

same breath that the UN

system is too cumbersome and

therefore ineffectual when

confronting those destabilising

challenges of modern

interdependence – such as

weapons proliferation,

environmental malpractice,

illicit or negligent financial

transactions, counterfeiting,

illegal migration, piracy etc. A

smaller core group of key

nations is required here, so the

argument runs, to broker the

international response to crisis

and chart a fresh way for

effective multilateral

cooperation.

This is not an altogether new

argument; it has circulated for

over 30 years at least, more

notably in the capitals of the

powerful who themselves

earlier formed the G7/G8 for

just such purposes. The

emergence of the G20 now

lends the issue appreciably

wider relevance although it is

not clear yet whether G20

totally supersedes G7/G8

which has reinforced the fact

of its continuing presence by a

collective decision to underpin

the Japanese currency in the

aftermath of the desperate

turmoil in that country with its

worldwide ramifications.

The claim that the UN system,

because of manifest

shortcoming, is incapable of

hard decisions should not be

taken simply at face value. We

will come back to that point as

well as to the trade-off

between legitimacy and

effectiveness. But there are

two immediate considerations

here. First, devising solutions

for destabilising challenges to

modern interdependence is one

thing, but to be effective all

such solutions require „buy in‟

across the entire

interdependent international

community of states,

irrespective of a country‟s size

and power. One weapons

proliferator for example, no

matter how small, can readily

and fatally undermine

international non-proliferation

collaboration. The same is true

of one polluter, one pirate

gang, one group of greedy

speculators and one band of

terrorists. The lesson is clear.

However particular solutions

are devised, their effective

acceptance and actual

application must be all

inclusive.

Implausible expectation

Secondly, and leading on from

this, it is quite implausible to

expect that the new top table

G20 can morph itself from a

budding global strategic

economic directorate, into an

oversight body holding to

account all 192 individual

nations in the world today

across the full spectrum of

Representatives of the G20 at the summit in 2010



their international rules based

obligations. That is a task that

must remain with established,

already empowered but freshly

renovated international

institutions – the UN, IMF,

WTO, World Bank etc. Within

those institutions reforms to

reflect the reality of G20

require that newly emerging

powers amongst G20 assume

equivalent management

responsibilities alongside

traditional managers in agenda

setting, decision making and

restoration of authority.

That will be a difficult

adjustment for the traditional

managers and a novel

experience for newcomers.

One overriding conclusion is

abundantly clear. The

consecration of G20 as an

effective new top table agency

compels reform of the UN and

related institutions. The two

issues are inextricably

connected. That should be an

article of NZ foreign policy

faith. NZ participation in the

newly formed G3G comprising

a band of smaller like minded

states at the UN, which share

concerns lest G20 ignore their

interests, is timely. The group

is forcefully committed to the

view the G20 is a complement

to, not a replacement for, the

UN which retains the essential

property of international

legitimacy. These principles

should now form part of any

NZ bilateral diplomatic agenda

with greater and lesser powers

alike.

Thus far the G20 focus has

centred exclusively on

restoration of equilibrium to

the global economy following

the 2008/09 crisis. Serious

policy differences persist about

the right balance to be struck

between austerity and stimulus

in the macroeconomic policies

of individual G20 members.

Recriminations over currency

manipulation, exchange rate

policy and so-called

quantitative easing are traded

between participants.

Improvements nonetheless

have been agreed to IMF

resources, borrowing

arrangements, special drawing

rights and changes to member

countries‟ quota distribution

which determine voting rights

inside IMF. But whether these

yet go far enough to satisfy the

largest emerging economies

amongst G20, notably those

from East Asia, whose

confidence in IMF and its

traditional remedies are

diminished, is questionable.

Even as the G20 has been

persuaded by the US and

Europeans to accept IMF as

their agency of choice, some of

the newly industrialising

governments rate the Fund as

little more than a branch of the

US Treasury. For as long as

the US remains both the

world‟s largest debtor nation

yet the sole IMF member with

a power of veto, there remains

an obviously fundamental

obstacle in the way of

equitable IMF responsibility

for sustaining global economic

equilibrium.

American Attitudes

As suggested earlier the world

owes the US an important debt

for her part in creating the

multilateral system. But over

the years, as UN membership

swelled and the range of

involved national interests

expanded, US disillusionment

with its own creation grew. US

ability to influence agendas

and secure desired outcomes

diminished. The cumbersome

methods of the UN, a lack of

direction in its Secretariat, the

rigid alignments of the Cold

War as well as those between

developed and developing

member countries were all

perceived to compound

ineffectiveness. The fondest

hopes on many sides that with

the end of the Cold War in

1989-90, the UN might, at long

last, come into its own were

severely disappointed. There

were plentiful ideas for reform

in circulation but no consensus



amongst the powerful on

whether to endow the UN

more effectively with

resources and mandates for a

relevant post-Cold War role.

During the GWB

Administration US

disillusionment about the UN

turned into outright hostility.

Some of these American

misgivings rubbed off on

closest allies, most notably

from NZ‟s point of view, upon

Australia.

The Obama Administration has

restored a better relationship

with the UN, which the

President describes as

indispensable but imperfect.

The US Ambassador to the UN

has asserted that “there can be

no substitute for the legitimacy

the UN can impart, or its

potential to mobilise the widest

possible coalitions.” Recent

changes to the political

complexion of the US

Congress, however, suggest

greater antipathy towards the

UN may re-emerge from that

quarter. There have, so far, not

been many substantive

American reform ideas aimed

to enhance the UN capacity for

initiative, or improve

democratic governance inside

the long established

institutions which would

reflect important changes in

global order. American reform

efforts concentrate rather upon

day-to-day administration,

accountability and

transparency in the UN as well

as increased effectiveness in

key areas like peacekeeping

(although this does not extend

to actual commitment of US

military or logistics to UNPKO

under UN command). These

are worthy targets, but why is

there not a more ambitious US

agenda?

Nature of Power

Part of the reason lies in the

fact that minds are obviously

concentrated upon the G20 and

its future role as the global

economic directorate as well as

those immediate tasks of post

crisis recovery. Part also is

explained by the emerging

debate inside the US, and

indeed elsewhere, about

whether in the wake of the

2008-09 global economic

crisis, the US is actually

entering upon relative decline

in power and influence. There

can be little dispute that US

economic leadership has been

damaged by its negligent

financial supervision which

provoked world-wide crisis.

American powers of recovery

remain of course formidable

but in this globalised

information age, serious

American commentators

themselves now anticipate a

world where power is

becoming more diffuse.

Military supremacy (which the

US possesses in spades) is not

itself sufficient if other

dimensions of power are

debilitated or dispersed, and as

or if, events in the world are

The International Criminal Court at The Hague,

Holland



driven by the forces of instant

communications technology

that are beyond the control of

the powerful (exemplified right

now by unforeseen region-

wide convulsions inside the

Middle East). A somewhat

more sophisticated

understanding is needed about

how actually to measure

balance of power.

Obama Strategy

President Obama‟s declared

strategy is America‟s national

renewal and revitalised global

leadership. The strategy

requires, above all else,

reduction of America‟s

sumptuous budget deficit. To

the extent that the UN

multilateral system can

mitigate, or reduce, the heavy

costs of the US global role by

discharging responsibilities

that might otherwise solely be

at Washington‟s charge, the

case for reform is sound. But

the President‟s domestic critics

would be quick to denounce

any new reform ideas for

multilateralism that might

imply greater sharing of

American global primacy.

Reputable arguments

elsewhere in favour of reform

rest however upon the basic

truth that power is not eternal,

and that the US needs to

ensure its notable legacy to the

world, and lock in place the

essential features of a just and

liberal world order by

improving the foundations,

with others, for an effective

equitable reformed multilateral

system. The G20 may indeed

be part of the answer to an

effective multilateral system

for international relations, but

a reformed, relevant and

equitable system of existing

institutions is an indispensable

part in its own right, of the

answer too.

American policy makers need

encouragement to reflect in

this way. NZ has recently

transformed its bilateral

relationship with the US into a

new space. This involves both

new challenges and

opportunities for the junior

partner. The challenges include

sustaining an even-handed

approach in regard to

multilateral reform with both

the US and China, and

avoiding the visible pitfall of

sub-optimal trade

arrangements with the US. The

opportunities on the other hand

lie with the improved climate

in the relationship that allows

NZ “to speak truth to power”

in ways that were previously

denied. Here we come back to

the trade-off between

legitimacy and effectiveness

which frames so much of the

debate for major powers about

reform of the multilateral

system.

As suggested earlier, part of

the trade off argument is that

the presence of smaller

countries (which are of course,

the majority in the world) in

any negotiation impedes

progress or debases the result.

The presence of smaller

countries, in other words,

creates ineffective

multilateralism. Those smaller

countries which are

conscientious participants in

the multilateral system should

not allow this version of events

to go unchallenged. NZ must

display ability here for

independent foreign policy

thinking. The record shows

Bosnian women weep near the

body of a relative at a mass funeral

for Bosnian Muslims and Catholics

killed during the Bosnian war held

at Rizvanovici village, near

Prijedor, Boznia-Herzegovina.



that the UN system has been

quite capable in many

instances of negotiation on

hard issues and that diminished

results are frequently as much

the product of disavowal by

important powers of the

outcomes as they are of too

many cooks in the broth. There

are of course prime examples

of failure. But these have been

often the result of ineffectual

outdated negotiating methods –

such as failed attempts by key

participants to pre-cook

outcomes or failure to devise

proper channels of delegation.

Notable agreements

Yet on the positive side of the

ledger there have been notable

agreements to conclude

negotiations on hard issues

such as to ban nuclear testing,

to curb arms production

(cluster weapons or land

mines), to strengthen

international justice (the

International Criminal Court),

to extend human rights

conventions (on the Rights of

the Child etc.), manage the

global commons (Law of the

Sea) amongst many other

issues. The US has not found

itself able to endorse a good

number of such agreements

although it has chosen to act in

conformity with some of those

laws/conventions agreed by

others.

The legitimacy versus

effectiveness argument about

the UN multilateral system

misses as well a larger point.

Over 70 years the system has

by its very existence, also

contributed substantially to

recognition of the crucial

connections in the international

system between sustainable

economic development and the

environment, of the links

between climate change and

resource security, economic

development and trade,

economic development and

poverty; to acknowledging

human security as the

indispensable foundation for

national and international

security; to devising new more

relevant measurements of

human security; to providing

prolonged protection for

refugees; to constructive crisis

management, to innovations in

preventive diplomacy and

peacekeeping and to extending

notions of justice and the

dignity of the human

individual. At the operational

level, its multiple technical

agencies have galvanized

member countries to new

approaches in food and

agricultural production, in

health protections and

improvements, labour

standards, transport and

aviation regulations,

meteorological cooperation,

intellectual property rights,

cultural heritage and much

else. It has discharged wide

ranging supervisory

responsibilities at the request

of its members, from nuclear

activities, to the conduct of

elections and the observance

cease fire agreements.

A newer younger generation of

policymakers today may be

unfamiliar with the hard

patient negotiation that over

the years produced such

outcomes which are pretty

much taken for granted. They

are now part of the

international furniture. The

need to nourish the system that

produced these results is

nonetheless indispensable as is

the need to recognise that if

one part of the international

rules based system is corroded,

then other parts will corrode.

There is an intrinsic coherence

to the rules based system. It is

not, for example, sheer

coincidence that the WTO

trade liberalisation

negotiations (the Doha Round)

have ground into the sand at a

point in time when there was

serious and prolonged

disagreement internationally

about authorisation of military

force in the name of the UN.

Yet after nearly 70 years the

system unquestionably needs

much renovation. There are

significant gaps, serious



failures and insufficient

coordination and cooperation

between key institutions – the

UN, the World Bank, the IMF,

the WTO – although some

improvements are being

sought.

Militarisation phenomenon

The case for serious efforts at

renovation of multilateralism

rests as well upon the state of

today‟s world as we find it.

Over the first 10 years of the

new millennium we have

witnessed a perceptible

militarisation in international

affairs. The shock of 9/11, the

fears, sometimes exaggerated,

of Islamic international

terrorism and the multiple

cases of internal conflict and

insurrection that beset many

regions, confronted the

international system with a raft

of complex tensions that

simply could not be ignored.

Over the past two decades the

US has found itself in a state of

almost perpetual war. Libya is

only the latest on the list of

conflict. In the 1990s a rash of

internal conflicts (particularly

in the Balkans) had

demonstrated that the UN is

not itself equipped (and rarely

mandated) to enforce peace

where war fighting is involved.

A division of labour emerged

therefore whereby the UN

Security Council legitimised

interventions which were then

contracted out to “coalitions of

willing member states” or to

competent regional bodies with

the requisite military prowess;

in particular to NATO whose

membership, mandate and

footprint were being extended

anyway by the leading powers

for their national security

reasons.

The UN stands for peaceful

resolution or prevention of

conflict. The line between the

end of war fighting and the

beginning of post-conflict

political, economic and social

reconstruction is often very

blurred. Afghanistan is

demonstrating that vividly

where there is increasing

evidence of military

involvement in reconstruction

and nation building. Proposals

that NATO might indeed be

equipped for such

involvements as a matter of

permanent course constitute a

further step along the pathway

to inexpedient militarisation of

international affairs. The UN is

better equipped through its

multiple technical agencies, its

defined impartiality and vastly

greater experience with nation

building, to discharge such

complex and prolonged

responsibility. This is indeed

one of the strongest reasons for

a serious collective effort now

to revitalise UN capabilities, in

particular through its new

Peace Commission, which still

seems to be experiencing

difficulty in engaging

effectively with the UN

Security Council. Greater

militarisation of international

affairs is not in the interests of

smaller countries and NZ will,

if it is successful in securing a

2015 UN Security Council

seat, need to be quite clear in

its own mind, as a non-NATO

member, about the principle

and wisdom of extending

NATO‟s role in ways that

could supplant the UN. On

grounds of cost and

duplication, quite apart from

principle, such a development

should be gently resisted.

Crucial touchstone

The relevance and

effectiveness of the UN and of

multilateral cooperation

generally, depends ultimately

of course on the harmony of

relationships between major

powers. In the present world

the US-China relationship will

be a crucial touchstone – both

globally and regionally. Given

the central place China now

occupies within the global

economy, Beijing justifiably

anticipates greater influence

within the international

financial institutions (IFI).



Otherwise, as a general

principle, China favours

greater democratisation of the

international system to reflect

an increasingly multipolar

world, based on precepts of

equality, mutual benefit and

respect. Inside the UN, China

continues to align itself

squarely with the developing

country group (G77) which

reflects its enduring priority to

improve economic and social

wellbeing of the great majority

of its population. Yet from a

NZ viewpoint, the bloc

dynamics of the UN system are

becoming increasingly archaic

as the multipolar world

unfolds, and interdependent

interests become mutually

reinforcing. The sustained

focus on domestic

development by most

successful emerging

economies, not just by China,

appears still to affect their

readiness to assume the new

burden of global responsibility

that would be involved inside a

reconditioned international

system. But more than that

they are not confident either

that space will be conceded by

the traditional powers to allow

them an equivalent place in the

management of an improved

system.

The US sees reform of

multilateralism as a means to

revitalise American global

leadership. In that sense, it

does not endorse multipolarity

even though President Obama

rightly insists that the US can

no longer “go it alone” in the

ways of his predecessor, and

wants to be involved with

others in the management of

international responsibility.

But the implication remains

that US preferences and

interests will continue to shape

the international agenda. There

are signs already that China

will not necessarily always

defer to US preferences. That

is not necessarily surprising

given the confidence that

China derives from the place it

now occupies in the global

economic scheme of things.

But China does not threaten

US security nor seek to usurp

America‟s place globally.

Washington is nonetheless

disturbed by what it perceives

to be new Chinese diplomatic

assertiveness, even

belligerence, as are some of

China‟s near neighbours. The

international climate for

multilateral reform, therefore,

is not particularly conducive.

Pacification role

In the circumstances, the role

of smaller countries in the UN

and beyond is to act as

pacifiers and avoid side taking

whilst urging renewal of the

UN and the multilateral system

where both the US and China

have different but equivalent

responsibilities. A particular

test for multilateralism will

likely come at the regional

level where the US has secured

a seat around the table of the

new East Asia Summit. This

has bestowed a unique

character upon East Asian

political/economic regionalism

that is not reflected in the

regionalisms of Europe, Africa

or Latin America, where the

US is not formally present.

The advance of China and of

other newly emergent

countries demonstrates above

all else that to be modern and

successful in today‟s world

does not now necessarily mean

being “western”. That in itself

is sufficient reason for

revitalising the UN multilateral

system in order to sustain an

ongoing universal forum where

convergence of interests and

values can be patiently

encouraged, but where, as

well, diversity, can be

understood and respected. That

need is emphatically reinforced

by the resurgence of religion as

a factor in international

politics, illuminated by Islam

as a defining influence of our

times. The “socialising” effects

of consistent exposure to

contrasting views and

aspirations through shared



membership in a relevant

universal assembly becomes

ever more vital in our

disembodied age of instant

internet communication.

Notes

► Stewart Patrick, The G20

and the United States:

Opportunities for More

Effective Multilateralism

(New York, 2010), pp39-41

► Ngaire Woods, Global

Governance after the

Financial Crisis: A New

Multilateralism or the Last

Gasp of Great Powers,

global policy, vol 1, No 1

(2010), pp.51-63

► US Assistant Secretary of

State Brimmer, Revitalising

the UN & Multilateral

Cooperation: Obama

Administration Progress

(Brookings, Feb 2011)

(state.gov/p/ion/rm)

► Joseph Nye, The Reality of

Virtual Power (Davos,

Project Syndicate, Feb

2011(www.projectsyndicate

.org/commentry/nye91/engl

ish).

► The Wellington

Declaration, Nov 2010

(www.mfat.govt.nz)

► For example, the United

States has not signed or

ratified the Law of the Sea

Convention,

Comprehensive Nuclear

Test Ban Treaty, the Kyoto

Protocol on Climate

Change, the Statute of the

International Criminal

Court, the treaties banning

cluster munitions and land

mines, the International

Conventions on Economic,

Social and Cultural Rights,

on Migrant Workers, on

Rights of the Child, on

Protection against Enforced

Disappearance, on

Discrimination against

Women, the Optional

Protocol to the Convention

on Torture, as well as six of

the eight ILO conventions

which set out core labour

standards. This is a notable

list!

your UNA‟s membership and

leadership, both past and

present, for 65 years of

commitment to the values and

ideals of the United Nations,

and for being steadfast and

active contributors to

WFUNA‟s vibrant global

network. In 1946 the founding

UNAs were ahead of their

time – recognizing the

increasing interdependence of

global issues, the unique and

essential role of the United

Nations, and the need for a

dynamic and resourceful civil

society to champion it. Today,

the role of WFUNA and

UNAs has become ever more

valuable as we support and aid

the United Nations in tackling

diverse international

challenges, and work towards

strengthening and improving

the world body.

As our contribution to your

national anniversary

celebrations this year, we have

arranged for a message from

Secretary-General Ban Ki-

moon for this occasion. Please

feel free to use this in your

publications and events

throughout the anniversary

year.

I look to your UNAs for

continued leadership and

collaboration as we continue

to grow and enrich our

organization in the coming

years.

Sincerely,

Bonian Golmohammadi

Secretary-General

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

Just one year after the

proclamation of the UN

Charter, our organization was

founded in the Grand Duchy

of Luxembourg, on 2 August

1946 by 22 United Nations

Associations. This year

marks the 65th anniversary of

this historic Plenary

Assembly, and the occasion

to celebrate the anniversary

of WFUNA and its founding

members. I would like to

express my congratulations to

http://www.projectsyndicate.org/commentry/nye91/english



http://www.mfat.govt.nz/



MAKING A DIFFERENCE: THE

ROLE OF A SMALL STATES

AT THE UNITED NATIONS

AMBASSADOR JIM MCLAY

Address to Juniata College, Pennsylvania

Summarised by Gray Southon

27 April 2011

This address commences with

the role of New Zealand and

other small states in the

formation of the UN‟s Charter,

creating a much greater

recognition of human rights,

including the rights of

indigenous peoples, the role of

the Economic and Social

Council and decolonisation, as

well as the opposition to the

Security Council veto – the

only provision that was forced

to a vote.

“Through almost seven

decades of conflict and

catastrophe, peace and

prosperity, small states have

worked to ensure the great

powers didn‟t monopolise an

institution whose role and

function affects everyone.

History has shown (as only

history can) that it‟s in the

interests of the international

community that small states be

represented and heard, and that

they can be influential in the

work of the United Nations

and beyond; that they can

make a difference.”

It then goes on to review the

nature of small states and their

role in the work of the UN in

greater detail, including within

the Security Council. Their

impact is included in the

effective veto in the SC of

seven non-permanent states,

some of which are small states.

A specific example is the role

of New Zealand in pressuring

the SC, albeit unsuccessfully,

to act on the 1994 Rwanda

catastrophe. More recently

with Libya, the role of the non-

permanent states was also

critical.

This address also discusses the

role of the UN in the context of

other multilateral institutions,

especially the G20, and the

impact of the private

international entities. While

these other organisations have

a role, the inclusive,

comprehensive nature of the

UN provides a legitimacy that

other interests often cannot

achieve.

Summary and extract – the full

version is available at:

http://www.nzembassy.com/un

ited-nations/news/address-by-

ambassador-jim-mclay-to-

juniata-college-pennsylvania

It then goes on to address:

New Zealand and Security Council Reform

Unlike some, I don't criticise

the “post-war settlement” of

1945 that gave us the United

Nations, even with its less-

than-perfect structures. It has

generally served New Zealand

well; and if we just focussed

on our own interests, it could

be argued we mightn‟t do as

well out of some of the

suggested changes to the UN.

Even so, we generally support

reform of the Security Council

that would, inevitably, bring

more members to its table -



because, given the value New

Zealand places on multilateral

engagement, it‟s not in our

broader interest that the

Council might lose credibility,

perhaps even be usurped. For

all its shortcomings, we value

the role that can be played by

the United Nations Security

Council. It is only through the

Council that the international

community can ensure we

don‟t repeat the mistakes of

Rwanda and Srebrenica;

indeed, it is only through the

Council that the international

community can deliver on the

promises of international peace

and security we made to each

other in the UN Charter of

1945.

We want a Security Council

that is ready, willing and able

to address such issues, and to

do so with the credibility that

comes from a broad-based,

contemporary membership and

structure. However, despite

widespread calls for reforms

that might deliver such

credibility, there‟s been little

progress over the past 20

years. And it‟s not just the

Council‟s structure that needs

reform. Its working methods

affect the ability of the rest of

us to follow and contribute to

its work, and directly impact

on the Council‟s legitimacy.

Reform of the Council‟s

structure and membership

would require amendments to

the UN Charter (thus

triggering the treaty approval

procedures required by many

national constitutions, not least

in the US); and that wouldn‟t

be required if we only changed

its working methods. New

Zealand therefore supports

current initiatives to make the

Council more transparent and

open; and it‟s again significant

that those proposals come from

a group of small states, known

as the “Small Five”. Some of

the P5 actively oppose such

measures, even arguing that

it‟s for the Council alone to

decide how it should operate.

New Zealand and the Security Council

Prime Minister John Key

addresses the United Nations

What then should the United

Nations expect of a small

Member State that seeks non-

permanent membership of its

Security Council?; and what

should a small state aspire to

achieve through that

membership? More

specifically, what can a small

state bring to the Security

Council? It‟s not enough that it

should simply seek to enjoy a

periodic “place in the Security

Council sun”, with neither an

agenda, nor a track record, nor

a relevant philosophy, let alone

meeting the Charter‟s

requirements that, when the

GA elects nonpermanent

members, “due regard …

[must be] specially paid, in the

first instance to the

contribution of Members of the

United Nations to the

maintenance of international

peace and security and to the

other purposes of the

Organization, and also to

equitable geographical

distribution”. I ask those

questions not just rhetorically,

but in a specific context.

New Zealand last served on the

Security Council in 1993-

1994, and is again seeking

election for the 2015-2016

term. At the UN, New Zealand

is recognised as an

independent and pragmatic

Member State, which

advocates and pursues

constructive solutions, doesn‟t

play bloc politics, and builds

bridges between factions. We



are not members of the G8 or

the G20, and, even though we

are very close to Australia and

the United States, and an

active participant in the

ASEAN Regional Forum

(ARF), the principal forum for

security dialogue in Asia, we

are not a member of any

military alliance; so we bring

an independent voice to

multilateral discussions. We

take balanced positions on

tough issues.

New Zealand is one of the

oldest and longest continuous

democracies, with the world‟s

eighth oldest national

parliament; it was the first

country to give women the

vote (in 1893); it‟s a multi-

racial society that has

developed unique structures

for addressing indigenous

issues; and it‟s a Pacific

country that reflects the culture

and values of its region. So, we

do have strong values to which

we consistently adhere; but we

don‟t necessarily seek to force

those values on others. We

contribute substantively to the

UN‟s work - both financially

and through participation in

UN and UN-mandated

peacekeeping missions; and

also by leading UN

negotiations on issues as

different as the development of

small island states, the rights

of persons with disabilities,

and control of small arms and

light weapons. We‟re also

known at the UN as leaders

and innovators; willing to

embrace and use new ideas -

small countries tend to bring

innovative, fresh ideas to an

organisation that is, too often,

hamstrung by political division

and drowned in absurd

bureaucracy (often maintained

under the guise of tradition)

Overall, New Zealand has a

reputation as a global citizen

with a global perspective and a

sense of global responsibility -

one that advocates actions and

outcomes based on the

international Rule of Law, and

participates meaningfully in

multilateral institutions. Even

though we are far from much

that tears and tramples at the

rest of the world, we often find

ourselves pushing much larger

countries to act differently (as

in respect of Rwanda), or

working with others to forge

compromises, or assuming the

responsibility of advancing key

policy objectives because the

larger powers are hamstrung

by their own - very often

competing - interests. In 2011,

we can‟t predict the problems

that will face the Council in

2015 and 2016; but they‟ll

certainly be the great issues of

the day - issues on which a

principled and independent

stance should make a

difference. New Zealand

would also bring a fresh,

Pacific perspective to the

Security Council‟s

deliberations - indeed, the

voice, culture and values of the

Pacific have only rarely been

represented at the Council‟s

circular table.

In terms of population,

markets, culture, outlook, and

our view of the world, we are

not Europe. We haven‟t just

applied the European template

to another, remote region; we

are an integral part of Asia-

Pacific; some of us have had to

show flexibility and

willingness partly to change

our identity, and our way of

doing things, to reflect a very

different region from that

which they might have come -

and, indeed, to reflect a very

different century from that

which went before. All that

means we don‟t necessarily act

or respond the way others do;

we don‟t necessarily approach

and solve problems in the

manner of others; and we are

different. We are, if you like,

the country that accounts for

40 percent of the world‟s dairy

trade; the same country that

gave you The Lord of the

Rings and the Flight of the

Conchords.



Security Council membership

will give us the opportunity to

apply all those attributes to the

vital and complex matters of

international peace and

security that confront the

Council.

Conclusion

Addressing the Uruguayan

Parliament in 1998, the then

UN Secretary-General, Kofi

Annan, said of small states that

they “are more than capable of

holding their own”, and that

“their contributions are the

very glue of progressive

international cooperation for

the common good”. It‟s

inevitable that every state will

view its UN membership

through the prism of national

self-interest; and the more

democratic the state, the more

that self-interest will be

influenced by those on the

street (autocracies can and do

ignore such views). The

resulting, noisy debate is the

sound of the United Nations at

work. Sometimes, that self-

interest can be enlightened;

sometimes, it will even

coincide with the interests of

the UN and the wider

international community - Kofi

Annan‟s “common good”.

From the day we first “argued

the toss” in San Francisco, and

for nearly seven decades since,

our principles have been

closely aligned with those on

which the UN was founded -

what‟s in the interests of the

UN, is often also in New

Zealand‟s interests. A small

state with that history and with

those attributes can make a big

contribution to the United

Nations. We don't seek

election to the Security

Council on the basis of some

mistaken sense of regional or

national entitlement; and, even

though we‟d represent a region

that‟s had less Council

membership than many others,

we‟re not simply claiming “our

share” or that “it‟s our turn”.

All this should be more than

just an insiders‟ game, with

participants selected by

rotation, and played out in an

isolated “East River Bubble”.

We seek a role at the “high

table” of international affairs

because we really do believe

we can bring a fresh

perspective to the Council‟s

great issues of peace and

security; because our track

record shows we can build

bridges and offer constructive

solutions, and that we can act

“professionally and credibly

and with nimbleness and

flexibility”; because we don‟t

belong to any self-interested

bloc, alliance or grouping;

because we are regarded by

others as principled,

independent, pragmatic,

innovative and trustworthy;

and, above all, because we

know (indeed, history tells us)

that we can make a difference.

And, after 66 years, in which

the UN has struggled its way

through conflict and

catastrophe towards peace and

prosperity, making a difference

is what it‟s all about.

UN Security Council in session



THE PACIFIC –

RESILIENT AND

REMEMBERED

BOOK LAUNCH BY

GOVERNOR GENERAL HIS

EXECELLENCY SIR ANAND

SATYANAND

Compiled by Lachlan Mackay

9 August 2011

On Wednesday 9th

of August,

the New Zealand Institute of

International Affairs, Victoria

University‟s Institute of Policy

Studies and the Pacific Co-

operation Foundation co-

hosted two launches in

recognition of the 40th

anniversary of the Pacific

Islands Forum and was

presided over by the Governor-

General, His Excellency Sir

Anand Satyanand.

The first launch was that of a

book, Resilience in the Pacific:

Addressing the Critical Issues

edited by Brian Lynch and Dr

Graham Hassall and the

second launch was that of a

project New Flags Flying:

Pacific Leaders Remember

compiled and edited by Ian

Johnstone and Michael

Powles. A brochure and

compact disc (containing

extracts of interviews with

early Pacific leaders) were

distributed and a website

www.rnzi.com/newflagsflying/

comprising the full interviews

and background notes was

announced. A book will follow

next year. Project supporters

for New Flags Flying included:

the Pacific Islands Forum

Secretariat, the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs, Radio New

Zealand International and

UNESCO Apia.

Resilience in the Pacific

brings “fresh insights into the

formidable array of major

challenges facing New

Zealand‟s Pacific

neighbours….It will be seen

that collectively they

highlighted the seeming

intractability of long-standing

regional and local problems:

weak governance, access

barriers in metropolitan

markets, political patronage,

population pressures on

limited natural resources, the

disproportionate size of public

sectors, and challenges around

economic and resource

sustainability.”

http://www.rnzi.com/newflagsflying/

http://www.rnzi.com/newflagsflying/



New Flags Flying cover

As well, New Zealand‟s near-

neighbours are now confronted

by a new suite of modern-day

issues: climate change, cross-

border crime, labour mobility,

and more recently the intrusion

of great-power rivalries into

the region. On a regional basis

the Pacific has to date

struggled to gain real traction

towards achievement of the

MDGs.

Yet grounds for cautious

optimism were identified: for

example, in the evidence

emerging that the region may

be blessed with more bountiful

natural resources in and

beneath its vast ocean realm

than has hitherto been realised.

Speakers pointed to areas of

opportunity under-valued or

untapped: in developing

visionary leadership, building

self-confidence, utilising the

strengths and loyalties of the

Pacific „diaspora‟, adopting

more ambitious schemes of

infra structure development,

promoting better awareness of

the quality of Pacific products,

and focussing donor

perceptions more on the

potential of the formal aid

programme to function as an

enabler to progress not as

growth constraint.

The official and civil society

dialogue on ways of tackling

Pacific issues more effectively

and successfully is destined to

continue for many years to

come. We trust the

accumulated experience and

wisdom captured in the

chapters of this volume will

represent a helpful contribution

to that on-going conversation”

http://ips.ac.nz/publications/pu

blications/show/319

New Flags Flying: Pacific

Leaders Remember is a

compilation of interviews with

former Pacific leaders

accompanied by text and

illustrations and captures a

time when the islands were

becoming independent –

between 1960 and 1990, strong

winds of political change

stormed across the Pacific.

“First in Polynesia, then in

Melanesia and Micronesia,

colonies became nations and

millions of „subjects‟ became

citizens.

A handful of men: teachers,

commoners, doctors, priests,

chiefs and trade unionist, led

them through those demanding

years.

Overcoming divisions,

conflicts and the heritage of

war and militarism, the Pacific

leaders fought hard for their

people and faced, head on, the

stormy winds of change.

Some were keen to go it

alone. Others wanted to stay

as they were. All knew

change was inevitable.

After the, bright new flags

were flying over Pacific

capitals as the leaders took

their people into an

uncertain future.

Listen now to those famous

men and their stories of the

time of change”:

http://www.rnzi.com/newfla

gsflying/overview.php\

The Governor-General‟s

speech in full from the event

is available from the URl

below:

www.gg.govt.nz/node/4485

http://ips.ac.nz/publications/publications/show/319

http://ips.ac.nz/publications/publications/show/319

http://www.rnzi.com/newflagsflying/overview.php/

http://www.rnzi.com/newflagsflying/overview.php/

http://www.gg.govt.nz/node/4485



CELEBRATING THE

UN INTERNATIONAL

YEAR OF

COOPERATIVES 2012

BY RAMSEY MARGOLIS

Executive Director, New Zealand

Cooperatives Association

In just four months, hundreds

of millions of people around

the world will be celebrating

and promoting cooperatives.

Likely to come just once in our

lifetime and probably only

once in the lifetime of our

children, a United Nations

International Year of

Cooperatives (IYC) is a huge

opportunity to increase

awareness and understanding

of cooperative and mutual

enterprise, and a year to

stimulate thinking, creativity

and leadership on legacy

projects that will live beyond

2012.

In December 2009, the UN

General Assembly declared

2012 to be the International

Year of Cooperatives, in

recognition of the contribution

of cooperatives to global social

and economic development.

General Assembly Resolution

A/RES/64/136 calls on all

member states, international

institutions, business and

others to promote cooperatives

and raise awareness of their

contribution to social and


promote the formation and

growth of cooperatives, and

invites all nations to form

national steering committees to

ensure a coordinated response.

The resolution is available

from the UN website at

http://social.un.org/coopsyear/.

The UN‟s official goals of the

International Year of

Cooperatives are to:

1 Increase public awareness

about cooperatives and their

contributions to socio-


the achievement of the

Millennium Development

Goals;

2 Promote the formation and

growth of cooperatives; and

3 Encourage Governments to

establish policies, laws and

regulations conducive to the

formation, growth and

stability of cooperatives.

The United Nations recognises

the definition of a cooperative

as that elaborated by the global

representative body for

cooperatives, the International

Cooperative Alliance (ICA):

“An autonomous association of

persons united voluntarily to

meet their common economic,

social and cultural needs and

aspirations, through a jointly

owned and democratically

controlled enterprise.”

While there are a relatively

small number of cooperative

and mutual enterprises in this

country, of which many prefer

to remain under the radar, they

are in the main very

successful.

It is well known, for instance,

that New Zealand‟s single

largest business is a

cooperative owned by 10,500



dairy farmers, Fonterra

Cooperative Group, but

probably less well known is

that when we add together the

annual revenue of the three

Foodstuffs cooperatives, they

are our second largest business

by revenue.

So it will come as no surprise

that when the turnover of the

country‟s cooperative and

mutual businesses are added

together, these member-owned

enterprises are likely to be

responsible for around 15% of

our GDP.

Finding out exactly what this

figure is and publicising it

widely is one of the tasks of

the UN IYC 2012 NZ Steering

Committee. Formed by the

New Zealand Cooperatives

Association, the UN IYC 2012

NZ Steering Committee will

be coordinating the activities

for the Year, creating a

programme of events and

activities.

Cooperative Movement

The cooperative movement is

rich in its diversity. It‟s also

decentralised by nature, which

means decisions and control

are not exercised in the centre.

With this in mind, many 2012

activities will have local

accents and flavours with co-

ops and credit unions

celebrating the Year with their

members, their staff and

community partners in

different ways.

Yet at the same time, the

cooperative movement has a

unity of purpose, sharing

unlike any other business

sector a set of international

principles, and governance

practices and structures.

The International Year of

Cooperatives 2012 will

provide an opportunity for co-

ops to offer common

messages, the common logo

will give the Year a common

visual identity, and the slogan

developed by the ICA –

Cooperative Enterprises Build

a Better World – will

complement existing corporate

identities.

“Cooperatives are a reminder

to the international community

that it is possible to pursue

both economic viability and

social responsibility.”

– United Nations Secretary-

General Ban Ki-moon.

Our aim for the UN IYC 2012

is to provide a legacy that

enables NZ politicians, policy

makers, regulators and the

media to have a clear

understanding of the

significance of cooperatives

and mutuals in the New

Zealand economy in terms of

production, employment,

income and the variety of

sectors, and a sense of how

many hundreds of thousands of

New Zealanders interact with

cooperatives on a daily basis.

We want these groups of

people to have a clear

understanding of the member-

driven, cooperative business

model, and how it differs from

the standard business model,

that of the investor-owned

firm.

It is also our intention to raise

awareness within the tertiary

education sector and

professional bodies such as the

NZ Institute of Chartered

Accountants and the NZ Law

Society around the cooperative

business model, and in so

doing persuade them to

introduce courses on

cooperatives into their

curricula.



In its simplest form, the UN

IYC 2012 will provide a

platform for:

► Advocacy

► Education

► Relationship building

► Garnering

understanding and support

► Celebrating the values

and spirit of cooperatives

► Creating pride in being

a cooperative.

The role of government in

support of cooperatives cannot

be underestimated.

Government policies forge the

regulatory environment within

which cooperatives operate.

The National Committee will

be asking the incoming Prime

Minister to host an official

launch of the UN International

Year of Cooperatives 2012 at

Parliament in February

immediately after the 2011

general election results are

announced.

A website specifically to

celebrate the International

Year of Cooperatives is being

developed. Intended to go live

in early 2012, it will be at:

http://newzealand2012.coop/,

and to keep up with New

Zealand IYC events on Twitter

follow @nzdotcoop.

Among events planned for the

Year is a cooperative research

conference in June 2012 which

is being organised by the New

Zealand Association for the

Study of Cooperatives and

Mutuals (http://nzascm.coop)

in conjunction with the IYC

Steeringl Committee and the

School of Economics and

Finance at Victoria University

of Wellington.

The Steering Committee is

presently looking for sponsors

for the Year. For a sponsorship

prospectus or to find out more

about the UN IYC 2012

National Committee, get in

touch with:

Ramsey Margolis

Executive Director

New Zealand Cooperatives

Association, Level 3, 75

Ghuznee Street

Te Aro, Wellington 6011

phone 04 384 4595

email [email protected]



National President Michael Powles

President’s Column

Our last UNANZ NEWS had

as its focus the successful

conference held at Parliament

on progress towards meeting

the Millennium Development

Goals in the Pacific. The

conference was a striking

example of what the UN

Association, at its best, can

achieve. Much was said that

deserved reflection and

ongoing attention. Too often,

when valuable meetings like

these are held on difficult and

complex issues, participants

rush back afterwards to busy

lives and have little time to

give further thought to what

has been said. Bucking this

trend, Robin Halliday,

Wellington Branch President,

organised a series of lunch-

hour seminars following up on

specific issues that had been

raised at the conference.

Although obviously fewer

participate in the seminars than

larger conferences, they have

enabled in-depth consideration

of key issues relevant to

development in the Pacific.

Indeed, for those interested in

Pacific questions, this is

something of a bumper year.

The climax is the 40th

Anniversary Meeting of the

Pacific Islands Forum in

Auckland. It is to be hoped that

all the celebrating and

symbolism will leave room for

quiet and serious discussion of

some of the region‟s hardest

questions. One that stands out

is how best to eradicate

poverty and encourage

sustainable development in the

region, on which many useful

suggestions were made at the

UNANZ conference and

UNANZ Wellington‟s

subsequent seminars. Another

key question, an increasingly

troubling one, is whether the

continued isolation of Fiji is in

that country‟s, the region‟s, or

New Zealand‟s best interests.

The United Nations

Organisation is an official

Observer of the Pacific Islands

Forum. Normally it is

represented at the Leaders‟

meetings at a comparatively

junior level. This year,

however, demonstrating the

importance he attaches to this

Leaders‟ meeting, Secretary-

General Ban-ki Moon is

attending. I hope our next

Newsletter will be able to give

full coverage to his Auckland

address.

Two developments are

underway that I hope will

provide opportunities to

increase our effectiveness.

The first involves very

welcome moves to increase

cooperation between UNANZ

itself and UN Youth. I began

discussion on this while

Richard Evans was National

President of UN Youth and

Elizabeth Chan, who has

succeeded Richard as National

President, is enthusiastic that

we should move ahead. Mary

Davies-Colley has been

invited, as UNANZ Vice-

President, to attend UN

Youth‟s National Council

meeting in Christchurch in

September for discussions on

the subject. In a future

Newsletter we will outline

some of the areas in which we

feel closer cooperation would

be valuable.

The second initiative is the



creation of what I have called a

„Current Issues Group‟. I

proposed this because I‟ve

become increasingly conscious

of the fact that while there are

current issues in which it

would be logical and desirable

for the Association to take an

interest, most of our members

are busy with jobs and many

and varied activities and have

little available time. By asking

for volunteers for a Current

Issues Group, and asking

volunteers to indicate their

particular areas of interest, the

hope is that we will be better

able to match the scarce time

of members with the demands

of a vibrant United Nations

Association. The response so

far has been positive but I will

defer taking any further steps

until there is time for this

Newsletter to have been

widely read. If you haven‟t

volunteered and would like to,

please email me at

[email protected] or

[email protected]

together with any subject areas

of interest. Doing this will

entail no obligation, of course,

to make additional time

available for UNANZ – but it

should make it easier for us to

know who might be

approached. I should also

emphasise that the role of the

National Executive and/or the

National Council in relation to

policy issues will not be

affected.

I expect to report in more

detail on these two

developments in our next

Newsletter.

In this issue there is much for

all who take an interest in the

United Nations and New

Zealand‟s role in it. I

particularly recommend

Terence O‟Brien‟s piece on the

revitalisation of the United

Nations. I believe there is no

commentator in New Zealand

who comes close to

challenging Terence‟s pre-

eminence on subjects relating

to the multilateral system and

New Zealand‟s place within it.

Then there is the text of an

address by Ambassador Jim

McLay on the role of small

states at the UN. This, too, is

essential reading and the

speech also usefully discusses

New Zealand‟s campaign for

election to the Security

Council.

Both Terence O‟Brien and Jim

McLay mention the distinctive

values that New Zealand

promotes internationally,

particularly within multilateral

organisations. For those

interested in the issue of values

in international relations and

how a country like New

Zealand can best relate to and

engage with countries whose

values appear to be quite

different – something New

Zealand is doing every day at

the United Nations - I strongly

recommend a glance at

Professor Rob Ayson‟s superb

recent Inaugural Lecture at

Victoria University, called

Interests, Values and New

Zealand’s Engagement with

Asia. A link to it can be found

at the website of the Centre for

Strategic Studies:

www.victoria.ac.nz/css/

REMEMBER

Volunteers and ideas for the

Current Issues Group to go to

Michael Powles at the email address

of:

[email protected]

or

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.victoria.ac.nz/css/





Co-presidents: Michael Shoff and

Gary Russell

NORTHERN BRANCH

The following article by Laurie Ross

was published in Peaceworks Winter

2011 – the Newsletter of the Peace

Foundation.

AUCKLAND: A PEACE CITY

Over the last seven months

representatives from

Auckland‟s peace groups have

worked closely with Auckland

Council officers to develop a

Peace City Declaration for

Auckland. This started from a

letter to Mayor Len Brown and

a presentation to Council last

November 2010 by Laurie

Ross. One of the prime

motivators is to ensure New

Zealand does all it can to

support the process of a

Nuclear Weapons Convention

for the abolition of nuclear

weapons.

The most effective way to do

this at present is to support the

International Campaign for the

Abolition of Nuclear Weapons

(ICAN). One significant way

to further this objective is to

empower civic leadership of

our cities in reaffirming the

principles of peace and

disarmament as part of their

core values. Thus, many

Auckland based organisations

are pursuing this goal

including the United Nations

Association NZ, Abolition

2000, Women‟s International

League for Peace and Freedom

and the NZ Peace Foundation.

The recent US Conference of

Mayors unanimously adopted a

resolution calling on President

Obama to pursue the

elimination of nuclear

weapons, implementing the

United Nations Secretary

General‟s 5-Point Plan. This is

endorsed by Mayors for Peace,

which has more than 4,700

members in 150 countries and

should be endorsed by our

Auckland Mayor and Council.

As SG Ban Ki-moon says,

„The road to peace and

progress runs through the

world‟s cities and towns.‟ It is

important to note that

Auckland and Waitakere Cities

each proudly adopted the

policy resolution declaring a

City for Peace in 2007

followed by North Shore in

2009. Christchurch has been a

leader in development of its

Peace City title since 2002

with numerous community

Peace Projects, wonderful

Peace Festivals and installing a

magnificent Peace Bell from

Japan in Hagley Park.

In addition, we must remember

the historic contribution New

Zealand made to nuclear

disarmament in 1987 when it

established Nuclear Weapon

Free Zone legislation as a

nation state. We must never

forget that this was based on

BRANCH

REPORTS UNANZ has active regional Branches

in Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga,

Wanganui, Wellington, and

Christchurch. The best way to get

involved in UNANZ is through your

nearest regional branch:

Auckland: [email protected]

Waikato: [email protected]

Tauranga: [email protected]

Wanganui: [email protected]

Wellington: [email protected]

Christchurch:[email protected] Model UN Assembly organized by Waikato UNANZ



individual council declarations

as Nuclear Free Zones, which

was the result of community

peace groups‟ submissions

during 1982 – 86.

Thus, we are proceeding on a

firm foundation for the

ongoing work to regenerate

our collective conviction to

achieve this goal for the

benefit of humanity. However,

in addition to reaffirming

commitment to the abolition of

nuclear weapons we share the

common higher values for

social justice, human rights

and nonviolence as the

conditions for building a more

peaceful society.

This would take the form of a

Peace City Declaration as

stated in our formal

submission to council on 16th

June 2011. Our deputation

featured three senior peace

workers from different groups

plus two Intermediate students

making the case on behalf of

Auckland‟s youth for the

Council to adopt the Peace

City Declaration.

The Declaration starts with:

„The Auckland Council

recognises its role of

stewardship for present and

future generations and hereby

declares Auckland to be a City

for Peace. Dedicated to the

promotion of nuclear free

zones and a culture of peace

based on social, economic and

environmental justice,

tolerance and non-violence.‟

There are twelve points that

elaborate on these principles,

which support New Zealand‟s

role in the international

community to actively pursue

the abolition of nuclear

weapons.

The council officers have

produced a brilliant report,

which further explains and

justifies the meaning, purpose

and value of making a Peace

City Declaration based on the

honouring of Tangata Whenua,

human rights and non-

violence. It also included

recommendations of

appropriate council projects for

practical manifestation of the

Peace City ethos that would

appeal to the public and

involve the community, such

as peace festivals, tree planting

and peace heritage walks.

At the June 16th meeting the

Councillors were divided on

the issue and voted to defer the

matter to the 21 local

(community) boards. Thus, we

now refocus our Auckland

Peace City Committee to carry

out this task of making a

presentation to each Board. It

would be highly desirable and

laudable for the Council and

local boards to support this

ethos even if there is no

funding available. Ideally, the

Council would take pride in

branding one annual event as

„The Auckland Community

Peace City Celebration‟, which

could be organised by local

groups in their area.

So, we ask each Local Board

to please support the positive

vision of Auckland as a Peace

City. At least let us support

Len Brown as our Mayor for

Peace, in order to make

Auckland part of the

international network of cities

working for abolition of

nuclear weapons. It does not

cost money, no budget funding

required; it is a statement of

principle.

For more information or to

help support the process please

contact Laurie Ross on (09)

818 0696 or email

[email protected]

President: Mano Manoharan

WAIKATO BRANCH

A Model UN assembly was

organized by the Waikato

Branch of the United Nations

association of New Zealand

and held on Saturday 13th

August 2011 in Cooper

Lecture Theatre, Price Water

House, Management School,

University of Waikato,

Hamilton. Most of the high



school students came dressed

up in the national costume of

the country they were

representing. Students

represented the following

countries: Russia, Iraq, India,

Iran, UK, Israel, South Africa,

Zimbabwe, Germany, France,

China, New Zealand, USA and

Libya.

They spoke and debated on the

topic: Framework for a State‟s

Application of the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights

within its territory.

The trophy for best high school

was won by Hillcrest High

School, Hamilton. Best

country costume prize went to

Hamilton Boys High School.

Best speaker prize went to

Sacred Heart Girls High

School, Hamilton. Best

chairperson‟s prize went to St.

Peters School, Cambridge

All students really enjoyed the

day, as they do not get the

opportunity to engage in Un

issues and Model UN in their

own schools.

UNA Waikato branch is the

only region in New Zealand

which does not charge a

registration fee for students.

and also provides a free lunch.

At the end of the day, in the

evaluation forms, a few

students made the following

comments: “Really cool,

having a chance to discuss

articles and ethics”, “Unique

experience that enables

students to express points of

view from different countries”,

“It was a good chance to meet

new people and learn about

global issues. Debates and

discussions were interesting”,

“Today has given me an

insight, an idea of how the UN

works in order to look at

differences in race, religion

and social class apparent in the

different countries present to

understand different cultures”,

“Really enjoyed meeting new

people, interesting

experience”, “Good”, “Very

informative and enjoyable

time”, ”It was a good

experience I learnt a number of

things”, “I‟ve really enjoyed

working with various schools,

I would definitely do this

again”, “Had a lot of fun”,

“Very interesting and

exciting”, “I love Model UN

Assembly and it is a highlight

of my year”, “Very

informative and enjoyable”.

Mano Manoharan, President of

the UN Association of New

Zealand Waikato Branch, says

the comments made by

students at the end of the day

clearly say that they do not get

this opportunity in their

schools. I am really thankful to

the teachers who had

encouraged the students to take

part in the assembly.

Branch President: Gray Southon

Tauranga Branch

Tauranga branch is in line for

three Model UNs this year,

with senior and junior

secondary school events

already held, and an

intermediate school event

planned in November in

conjunction with Tauranga

Intermediate School. While

this latter event will be in-

house to complement a Future

Problem Solving program,

other schools will be invited.

We feel the link between

Future Problem Solving and

the Model UN will be very

valuable, and the arrangement

will strengthen the interest

within intermediate schools, as

well as within secondary

schools in subsequent years.

Our youth executive members,

Chennoah Walford and Lucas

Davies are doing a great job in

chairing these events.

One of our highlights has been

the visit of Michael Powles

who talked to a joint evening

meeting with the Chinese

Friendship Association on the

challenges of constructive

relations with China, and a

joint breakfast with Amnesty

International on human rights



in China. Both meetings

stimulated fascinating

discussions. His visit was

supplemented by an informal

lunch with leaders of the other

organisations, a press

interview and a “meet a

diplomat” session for youth.

We have also had joint

sessions with the Labour Party,

the National Party and are

planning one with the National

Council of Women.

Another innovation is a

biweekly discussion session on

UN topics and concerns.

President: Robin Halliday

Wellington Branch

The United Nations

Association National

Conference in May had as its

theme Achieving the


Goals in the Pacific. The

keynote addresses were

featured in the June newsletter

but there were valuable

contributions made from

panellists on issues such as

Poverty Alleviation, Education

and Gender issues, Health,

Tourism and Environmental

Sustainability, Trade and

Access to Credit. It was

therefore proposed that a series

of roundtable discussions be

held on some of these issues.

The series of six lunch hour

forums organised by

Wellington Branch have now

been held with experienced

presenters leading discussion.

They have included

Delivering the MDG’s

globally Compromises and

Challenges – Prof Paul

Morris UNESCO Chair of

Interreligious Understanding

and Relations in New Zealand

and the Pacific.

Professor Morris had recently

attended a UN Alliance of

Civilisations Meeting in Doha

where the theme was

delivering the MDGs globally.

The message was mixed and

asked more questions than it

answered. Overall the

achievement is considerable

but that is heavily weighted by

the substantial gains made in

China and to a lesser extent

India and it is argued that

would have been achieved

without the targets set by the

UN. It has resulted though in

eradicating poverty for

millions of people. Areas

where little or no progress has

been achieved include parts of

the Pacific, though as small

nations they do not feature to

any extent in the latest UN

report. The 2008 financial

meltdown has affected it but

there is general agreement on

the need for Nutrition, Health

and Education targets to be

met. These include safe water

and sanitation. Paul is

currently researching the

changing nature of the

Churches in the Pacific. The

growing influence of the

American tele-evangelists and

the Mormons along with

urbanisation is lessening the

role of the traditional

conservative churches even in

Samoa and Tonga.

A comment made was that the

UN had to deal with a messy

world when getting agreed

pledges honoured.

Governance Law and Local

Values – Michael Powles

National President UNANZ

former senior diplomat with

extensive experience and long

term interest in the Pacific.

Poor governance is

acknowledged by both Pacific

leaders and development

partners as having a seriously

harmful impact on the lives of

Pacific peoples. But despite the

commitment of significant

resources, “good governance”

programmes and projects have

not led to significant

improvement. In this situation

there is a strong case for

identifying and promoting

relevant traditional values that

support the principles of good

governance. Values, whether

they be Western, Egyptian,

Chinese, Indian etc have



evolved over many centuries

and Pacific values are based on

an oral tradition where Land

and property rights play an

important part. Values are a

community norm expected to

be delivered and are

remarkably similar globally

but expressed in different

ways. Do we then when

dealing with Pacific peoples

need to listen more or find a

more contextualised code with

relevant values taken into

account? While this may seem

common sense it has not

always happened.

Comments included

questioning as to whether an

adversarial legal system was

necessarily appropriate and can

we accept traditional customs

such as a bride price?

On Gender equity and the

empowerment of women in

the Pacific: some feminist

reflections on Fiji’s women

soldiers – Dr Teresia Teaiwa

Feminist scholar and Poet

who teaches at the Pacific

Studies programme Victoria

University of Wellington.

Dr Teaiwa has been

researching an Oral history of

women in the Fiji Military

Forces. Fiji is a highly

militarised society with over

2000 Fijian soldiers in the UK

defence forces, 3000 in Fiji

and many others in UN and

serving as private security

officers in conflict areas. They

are second only to the

Gurkhas. To comply with UN

peacekeeping regulations on

gender equity, in 1988 they

began recruiting women

officers, many of them well

educated and in employment.

Her research has shown that

they seek this as professional

role and a way to travel. They

want fully operational

positions and are highly

respected. It allows them to

contribute well financially to

their families. They are 99%

Fijians.

Comments included the

influence of family members

on choice of career and this is

seen here in Maori

communities. There was some

discussion as to whether it

should be discouraged,

Eco Tourism and the

Environment – Forest and

Bird project Vanuatu – Sue

Maturin Tour Leader with 20

years involvement with Eco

Tourism project in Vathe

Forest Park in Santos and

Helene Ritchie Tourist and

WCC Councillor

Linking through Skype, Sue

Maturin gave us the history of

the conservation area

beginning in the early 90s with

the need to save the forest

from logging and develop an

income through eco tourism.

The intent was that it be a

community initiative,

community owned, but there

were initial difficulties with

land ownership and authority

disputes and more recently the

need to eradicate the big leaf

vine that was smothering the

Forest. Initially funded through

UNEP and SPREP, Quaker

Friends are now assisting to

fund the villagers to eradicate

it. But first a Forest and Bird

member and weed eradication

expert developed a way of

injecting the vine with pesticide

before cutting. Sue has taken 14

tours to the village and the

recent one reported that the

vine has now been dealt with

effectively. As this is a problem

in other parts of the Pacific and

Asia they are being it asked to

help. We saw a short film of the

methods used.

Comment: Though this was a

small project with community

support and dedicated assistants

it was still very complex given

land and leadership issues.

While now considered

successful it is operated

privately and not communally.

The Future of the Solomon

Islands and the Role of the

Armed Forces. – Col Andrew

Brown (Defence Research)

LTCDR Andrew Lincoln (Asst

Dir Strategic Commitments)



Sheryl Boxall (Senior Defence

Analyst)

The focus was on the need for

a long term view for defence

operations and not just a

reactive response. In complex

environments this required

innovative thinking with

adequate theory of adaption.

When we set goals we need to

focus on them so they become

a reality. They then gave an

assessment – from practical

experience of the situation in

The Solomons, what had been

achieved what had changed

and what tensions that had

created. While through

RAMSI Australia had taken

the lead New Zealand as a

more Pacific based defence

force along with the other

Pacific forces had assisted

greatly. Security is necessary

for the MDGs to be delivered

but there were still questions

asked about what else had been

achieved and how to know

when was the time to leave.

Comments included the need

for a request from the country

involved for outside assistance

and determining who that

should come from. It was also

noted that there were other

factors such as resource

management land issues and

urbanisation that were taking

place and affecting security.

Maternal Health Matters

Delivering MDGs in the

Pacific – Dr Jackie Blue

National MP and Chair of

Parliamentarians’ Group on

Population and Development.

Jackie Blue outlined the

relevance of the NZ

Parliamentarians Group, the

Open Hearing they held in

2009 and the report produced

Making Maternal Health

Matter.

In the Solomon Islands five

mothers a day die from birth

complications or malaria and

other preventable diseases.

Adolescent pregnancy is high

and they are not on track to

deliver Goal 5 of the


Goals which is to reduce by

three quarters the maternal

mortality ratio. Surveys show

that they would like to have

fewer children and fewer but

healthier children is a good

economic investment. She

hopes that the Solomon Islands

Leader will discuss this at the

Pacific Leaders Forum next

month. It is not helpful to see

this as a women‟s issue only

and the education of young

men is vital. Dr Blue has

recently spent time in The

Solomons where she opened a

Medical Specialists

Conference on Maternal and

Reproductive Health, then

visited many of the

stakeholders including a

wonderful Sister Doreen from

Sistas Sarve. High school costs

mean that girls education is not

given priority and if they

become pregnant they are

expelled. Family violence is

prevalent and women often

lack self esteem. Jackie

believes that if women were in

Parliament this would help

Dr Blue addressing the meeting on Maternal Health Matters.



greatly. 18 stood for election

but none received enough

votes. There are now moves to

introduce a temporary women

quota. More Aid money is

being directed to assist in the

area of maternal and

reproductive health but much

more is being directed at

HIV/AIDs education and

prevention.

Comments: Women are

standing for Parliament but

women are not yet voting for

them in sufficient numbers.

Culture issues are important to

take into consideration when

designing aid programmes.

Unsafe abortions are still a

problem in spite of legislation

to allow it.

UN Youth Conference Adelaide 10 th – 17th July 2011

This conference was to educate

the young leaders of tomorrow

in the issues in our world today

and to also gain an image of

the globe through younger

eyes. Over the course of 7 days

those lucky delegates from

Australia, New Zealand, and

Japan were able to experience

some of the most life changing

and eye opening events of their

lives. Debates, workshops,

discussions, and seminars were

the tools and the delegates

were the building blocks. The

conference also incorporated a

Model United Nations

Assembly at the end.

The conference was centred on

this one main workshop called

“Youth Change”. This was

where small groups of

delegates discussed what

issues were really important in

today‟s world and developed

policies to put forward to the

Australian Government. My

specific category of discussion

was International Relations

and The Effect of the Libyan

Crisis on Diplomatic

Relations. In groups of only

about 5 we shared our own

knowledge and understanding

of the issue and developed

these ideas into a workable

policy for the Government.

Many other categories of

policy included; education,

trade, indigenous affairs, and

sustainability.

UNYC also incorporated

debates and Q&A sessions

with leading politicians and

lecturers which provided

insight into how they think.

Even „Australia‟s most hated

man‟ Chris Pine was part of

one of the debates. The high

level of content in these

debates simply overwhelmed

us as delegates and many were

keen to question their opinions

and views. One key debate for

me was the question of nuclear

disarmament and if it will be

achieved within our lifetimes.

Through the entire debate my

view swung from side to side,

being convinced by each of the

impressive list of speakers but

unfortunately an almost

unanimous vote said that it

couldn‟t be achieved. This was

just one debate that left a

lasting impression on my mind

and will always be

remembered.

One of the shocking

revelations that I experienced

was the revealing of

Australia‟s human rights

record and how it has been

extremely bad. Aboriginal

people had not been

acknowledged as the

traditional owners of the land

until the 1960s. This shocked

me and gave me a new respect

for New Zealand‟s moves to

fix issues surrounding the

Treaty of Waitangi and

subsequent problems

surrounding indigenous affairs.

All in all, it was a privilege to

be there. Listening, learning,

laughing and lasting

friendships made it an

unforgettable experience. I‟m

looking forward to the next

opportunity to attend a UN

Youth Conference.

Byron Terris

Speach Award winner 2011



MODEL UN

ELIZABETH CHAN

President: UN Youth - [email protected]

In July, the current UN Youth

National Executive took office

with Elizabeth Chan as

National President, and five

Vice-Presidents: Chloe

Muggeridge, Chris Park,

Oliver Clifford, Victoria

Clarke and Brooke

Muggeridge. NZ Model UN

2011 was a very successful

event, with delegates

participating in outreach

projects in the local

community for the first time.

We also welcomed home our

UNYC 2011 delegation, which

had a great week in Adelaide,

and also selected our

THIMUN 2012 delegation to

The Hague. We are also proud

to establish the UN Youth

Innovations Grant this year.

Donated by UN Youth

alumnus, Bradley Scott, this

grant aims to foster effective

development and use of

technology in UN Youth. The

successful applicant for this

grant will receive $500 to

develop his or her innovation.

The Auckland region has had a

busy recent period with our

University Model European

Union and High Schools

Model Security Council, not to

mention a social university-

level pub quiz. All of these

events ran very smoothly and

had great, engaging topics for

debate. The success of these

events are certainly a credit to

the dedication of the young

people who oversee them, and

we hope all our new delegates

stay involved with UN Youth.

The Wellington region is in the

midst of its busiest season.

Recently it held the Wellington

Universities Model Security

Council and successfully ran

the inaugural Central North

Island Model Security Council

in Whanganui. Next was the

Wellington High Schools

Model Security Council held at

Parliament on August 24 and

then the Wellington Crisis

Model UN which capped off

nicely what has been a very

successful year for the region.

The Canterbury region is

pleased to be moving forward

with plans for three events in

September. A Historical Model

UN conference will be held

Christchurch on September 15.

The Canterbury Regional

Council will then be travelling

to the West Coast and Nelson

to hold the West Coast Model

UN conference and the Nelson

and Marlborough Model UN

conference. We are pleased to

be able to present these events,

regardless of the adversity we

have been facing recently. We

plan to hold a strategic

planning weekend during our

trip to the West Coast and

Nelson to set out our plans for

the 2012 calendar year.

The Otago region has existed

since 2006. Initially we helped

Rotary run their annual

MUNA event. We still do this

and the event attracts over 100

students from all over Otago

and Southland. However as we

have grown and matured, we

are now proud to offer

annually the Model Pacific

Islands Forum, Southland

Model UN and a Security

Council for High School

Students. For our iconic

student community we run a

Security Council and a Benefit

MUN. This year we also

hosted our first ever national

event, the New Zealand Model

Security Council in the last

week of August.




ABOUT THE

UNANZ NEWS The UNANZ News is the

quarterly publication of the

United Nations Association of

New Zealand.

UNANZ News welcomes

articles, short letters, and

images from outside sources.

If you would like to submit

something for consideration,

please send it to the newsletter

editor Pete Cowley.at

[email protected]

CONTACT PO Box 24-494

Wellington Central

Wellington 6142,New Zealand

(04) 496 9638

[email protected]

PATRONS: Rt Hon Helen Clark

- Administrator UNDP

WE THE

PEOPLES

FOUNDATION Trustees: Pamela Jeffries,

John Hayes, Russell Marshall.

To make a donation or

bequest to the We The

Peoples Foundation for the

benefit of UNANZ please

contact [email protected].

Charities Commission CC38918

Incorporated Societies 215914

UNANZ

National Council and Affiliates

UNANZ Membership:

Name: ___________________________________________________________

Address: __________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Phone: _______________________Email:________________________________

Region of choice: Membership Fee:

❍ Canterbury ❍ Tauranga ❍ Individual/Family - $30

❍ Wellington ❍ Waikato ❍ Student/Unwaged - $20

❍ Wanganui ❍ Northern ❍ Affiliated Oganisation - $50

❍ Corporate Member - $100

Send to: PO Box 24494, WGTN ❍ Donation: $___________

National President

Michael Powles

National Vice Presidents

Mary Davies-Colley

Lachlan Mackay

UN Youth President

Elizabeth Chan

Treasurer

Robin Haliday

National Council Representative

Izolda Kazemzadeh

Special Officers

Natasha Barnes - Peace and Security

John Morgan - Human Rights

Gray Southon - UN Renewal

Jean-Paul Bizoza - Humanitarian Affairs

Gray Southon - WFUNA Liaison

Ordinary Members

Margaret Arnold

Alyn Ware

Affiliate Representatives

Bradley McDonald (Esperanto)

Beryl Anderson (NCW)

Joy Dunsheath (UN Women)

Helena McMullin (WILPF)

Branch Presidents

Northern Region: Michael Shroff, and

Gary Russell

Waikato: Mano Manoharan

Tauranga: Gray Southon

Wanganui: Kate Smith

Wellington: Robin Halliday

Canterbury: Mary McGiven

Honorary Life Members

Gwen Ryan, Margaret Knight,

Dame Laurie Salas, Robin Halliday,

Lady Rhyl Jansen, Joan Morrell,

Grace Hollander, Ivan Demsem,

Carrick Lewis, Patricia Morrison,

Diana Unwin, Clinton Johnson,

Gita Brooke, Mary Gray,

Colin McGregor

Affiliate Members

National Council of Women NZ

NZ Assn of Rationalists & Humanists

NZ Council of Trade Unions

Operation Peace Through Unity

Soroptimist International SW Pacific

NZ Esperanto Association Inc

UN Women, NZ Baha‟i Community,

Women‟s International League for Peace

and Freedom (WILPF), National

Consultative Committee on Disarmament

(NCCD), Post Primary Teachers

Association (PPTA), AFS Intercultural

Programmes, UNICEF New Zealand,

NZ Educational Institute (NZEI),

International Physicians for the

Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW),

The Asia Network.


2011 09 UNANZ Newsletter

Documents

Transcript of 2011 09 UNANZ Newsletter