Nepal’s bid for UNGA chair
Yuba Nath Lamsal
It is the turn of Asian continent to get the chair of the United Nations General Assembly for the year 2011. Nepal has staked a claim for the chair of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) for which Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal has already started lobbying for Nepal’s candidate. Some other countries including Qatar are also eying the prestigious post of the world body.
The chair of the UNGA, which is the top most position of the UN system, rotates among different geographical regions of the world that include Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe, Latin or Caribbean region and West Europe. In Asian’s quota, Bangladesh, Malaysia, South Korea and Bahrain had got the opportunity to chair the UNGA in the past.
Nepal has proposed Kulchandra Gautam, a former assistant under secretary general of the United Nations, for the coveted chair of the UN General Assembly. The caretaker prime minister, in a bid to garner support for Gautam’s candidacy in the UN, has already met ambassadors of some Asian countries based in Kathmandu and sought the cooperation from their respective countries.
As a Nepali, one ought to support Gautam’s candidacy because it is the first time that Nepal has claimed for the UNGA chair. However, Gautam’s chances to be elected to the prestigious job appear to be very slim. Firstly, Gautam does not possess high profile background required for such a high-level and prestigious diplomatic position. He is just a former employee of the UN system, who rose to the level of assistant under secretary general, which, in the UN hierarchy, is not a senior post but a medium level one. Being a former medium level employee of the UN system alone is not a qualification to get into such a high profile and prestigious job.
The way Gautam’s name was picked and proposed, it looks as though he is Prime Minister Nepal’s personal candidate but not of the country. Prime Minister Nepal personally picked him without consulting the constituents of the coalition government. The government should have held due consultation with all parties on the matter so that there would have been a national consensus on Gautam candidacy. That would have made Gautam’s candidacy stronger. Even Foreign Minister Sujata Koirala and officials at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were in dark when the decision on this matter was taken.
When the candidacy for UNGA chair was first mooted, the Nepali Congress had informally proposed its central leader Dr Ram Sharan Mahat. However, some differences occurred among the coalition partners in general and between the foreign minister and the Prime Minister in particular about Dr Mahat’s candidacy. Moreover, Dr Mahat himself was not interested as he was not sure of his victory for the post because oil-rich Qatar, which has more diplomatic maneuvering and influence in the international arena, has already claimed it on Middle-East quota. All Gulf and Muslim countries are likely to back Qatar’s bid. Still Mahat could have been better candidate as he, who served as the finance and foreign minister as well as the chairperson of the National Planning Commission, has more political clout and credentials. Gautam lacks that credential and clout. He was not even holding any formal position in Nepal when his candidacy was proposed. Knowing, perhaps, this, the caretaker Prime Minister hurriedly announced Gautam as his foreign affairs advisor, which was done just to give him an official credentials. His name was proposed by the caretaker prime minister who had already resigned, which is the weakest point for Gautam’s candidacy. The decision of the caretaker government may not necessarily be endorsed by the new government. This decision should either have been taken before the prime minister had resigned or waited till the new government is formed.
It would, of course, be a matter of prestige and honour for Nepal, if Gautam gets elected to the prestigious UN post. Every Nepali citizen would be proud to see a fellow Nepali to be on the top job of the UN system. However, the government’s hasty decision has made Gautam’s candidacy weaker right at the beginning. At the same time, the questions are being raised from some quarters about the justification of Gautam’s candidacy for the UN chair. People are asking and will ask in future what contribution he has made for Nepal and why he should be chosen as Nepal’s candidate for the UN job. What had he done for Nepal when he was in the United Nations system? Now he has spoken of having more representation of Nepal in the UN bureaucracy. What he did when he was in the position of doing a lot during his service in the UN system. These are the questions that need to be answered either by the government or Gautam himself to the satisfaction of the people.
Gautam holds good degrees from the United States universities. He was selected as a Fulbright scholar to study in the United States universities. He was chosen as a Fulbright scholar on condition that he would return and serve in Nepal after completing his degrees in the United States. But he did not comply with his own pledge but joined the United Nations service. This speaks of his dishonesty. In the list of Nepali Fulbright fellows, his name figures as the ones ‘whose whereabouts is not known’. This may also make his chance weaker.
Moreover, Gautam spent almost 30 years, best of his life, serving the UN and doing virtually nothing for Nepal. After retirement from the UN service, he has, now, sought even more plump and prestigious job on Nepal’s quota, which can by no means be justified. There are some qualified diplomats, former ambassadors and ministers who have worked for Nepal throughout their life. They could be better and more justified candidates for the post of the chair of the UN General Assembly.
Given this background, it may be not possible for Gautam to be chosen for the coveted post. Firstly, Gautam‘s background may not be sound to claim the chairperson of the UNGA. As a former medium level employee may not be well received and appreciated by the Asian countries. More than that Nepal’s diplomatic maneuvering is weak compared to its competitor. In recent years, Nepal’s image has been badly tarnished in the international arena because of the political instability at home and diplomatic incompetence abroad. Given the political instability, uncertainty and conflict, Nepal is being dubbed in the international arena as one of the failed states in the world. This is the making of Nepal’s political parties. This is also likely to weaken the position of Nepal in its bid for UNGA chair.
The ongoing row with the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) is yet another case that has dampened the image and credibility of Nepal in the international community. The government and the ruling parties trying to send the UNMIN packing as the UN Mission’s performance did not suit their partisan interest. The UN mission came to Nepal not on its own choice but at the formal invitation of the government of Nepal and political parties to monitor the Constituent Assembly election, peace process and the management of the arms and armies of the Nepal Army and the Maoist combatants. Now only half of the mission has been accomplished. The main job of the management of the arms and armies remains unresolved. The tripartite agreement between the UN, Nepal Government and the UCPN-Maoist has outlined the mandate and jurisdiction of the UNMIN, according to which it has been functioning in Nepal. After completing its mission, the UNMIN would automatically go away. But it depends upon the political parties. If political parties act swiftly and agree on early management of arms and armies of the Maoist combatants, the issue would be resolved early, which would pave the way for UNMIN’s departure from Nepal. But the government and the ruling parties are making a big hue and cry in public against the UNMIN and are demanding UNMIN’s early exit from Nepal. But they have failed to follow the due procedures. If the government and parties, at all, want UNMIN to go away, they must write to the UN Secretary General and the UN Security Council. The UNMIN would go back only when the Security Council calls it back. What the government and the ruling parties are saying and doing is against the accepted norms and rules of international diplomacy, which is yet another example of diplomatic naiveté of Nepal. Moreover, the government is just one constituent of the three parties that signed the tripartite agreement. The rest two parties are the UNMIN itself and the Maoists. Since the Maoists are not in favour of UNMIN’s premature exit, the decision of the government alone would not be binding for the UNMIN. This row with the United Nation regarding its mission in Nepal is likely to cost heavily for Nepal in the election for UNGA chair. If Nepal wants its candidate to be elected, it has to immediately end its row with the UN Mission in Nepal and create a better and more credible image in the United Nations and in the international arena as a whole.
It is the turn of Asian continent to get the chair of the United Nations General Assembly for the year 2011. Nepal has staked a claim for the chair of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) for which Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal has already started lobbying for Nepal’s candidate. Some other countries including Qatar are also eying the prestigious post of the world body.
The chair of the UNGA, which is the top most position of the UN system, rotates among different geographical regions of the world that include Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe, Latin or Caribbean region and West Europe. In Asian’s quota, Bangladesh, Malaysia, South Korea and Bahrain had got the opportunity to chair the UNGA in the past.
Nepal has proposed Kulchandra Gautam, a former assistant under secretary general of the United Nations, for the coveted chair of the UN General Assembly. The caretaker prime minister, in a bid to garner support for Gautam’s candidacy in the UN, has already met ambassadors of some Asian countries based in Kathmandu and sought the cooperation from their respective countries.
As a Nepali, one ought to support Gautam’s candidacy because it is the first time that Nepal has claimed for the UNGA chair. However, Gautam’s chances to be elected to the prestigious job appear to be very slim. Firstly, Gautam does not possess high profile background required for such a high-level and prestigious diplomatic position. He is just a former employee of the UN system, who rose to the level of assistant under secretary general, which, in the UN hierarchy, is not a senior post but a medium level one. Being a former medium level employee of the UN system alone is not a qualification to get into such a high profile and prestigious job.
The way Gautam’s name was picked and proposed, it looks as though he is Prime Minister Nepal’s personal candidate but not of the country. Prime Minister Nepal personally picked him without consulting the constituents of the coalition government. The government should have held due consultation with all parties on the matter so that there would have been a national consensus on Gautam candidacy. That would have made Gautam’s candidacy stronger. Even Foreign Minister Sujata Koirala and officials at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were in dark when the decision on this matter was taken.
When the candidacy for UNGA chair was first mooted, the Nepali Congress had informally proposed its central leader Dr Ram Sharan Mahat. However, some differences occurred among the coalition partners in general and between the foreign minister and the Prime Minister in particular about Dr Mahat’s candidacy. Moreover, Dr Mahat himself was not interested as he was not sure of his victory for the post because oil-rich Qatar, which has more diplomatic maneuvering and influence in the international arena, has already claimed it on Middle-East quota. All Gulf and Muslim countries are likely to back Qatar’s bid. Still Mahat could have been better candidate as he, who served as the finance and foreign minister as well as the chairperson of the National Planning Commission, has more political clout and credentials. Gautam lacks that credential and clout. He was not even holding any formal position in Nepal when his candidacy was proposed. Knowing, perhaps, this, the caretaker Prime Minister hurriedly announced Gautam as his foreign affairs advisor, which was done just to give him an official credentials. His name was proposed by the caretaker prime minister who had already resigned, which is the weakest point for Gautam’s candidacy. The decision of the caretaker government may not necessarily be endorsed by the new government. This decision should either have been taken before the prime minister had resigned or waited till the new government is formed.
It would, of course, be a matter of prestige and honour for Nepal, if Gautam gets elected to the prestigious UN post. Every Nepali citizen would be proud to see a fellow Nepali to be on the top job of the UN system. However, the government’s hasty decision has made Gautam’s candidacy weaker right at the beginning. At the same time, the questions are being raised from some quarters about the justification of Gautam’s candidacy for the UN chair. People are asking and will ask in future what contribution he has made for Nepal and why he should be chosen as Nepal’s candidate for the UN job. What had he done for Nepal when he was in the United Nations system? Now he has spoken of having more representation of Nepal in the UN bureaucracy. What he did when he was in the position of doing a lot during his service in the UN system. These are the questions that need to be answered either by the government or Gautam himself to the satisfaction of the people.
Gautam holds good degrees from the United States universities. He was selected as a Fulbright scholar to study in the United States universities. He was chosen as a Fulbright scholar on condition that he would return and serve in Nepal after completing his degrees in the United States. But he did not comply with his own pledge but joined the United Nations service. This speaks of his dishonesty. In the list of Nepali Fulbright fellows, his name figures as the ones ‘whose whereabouts is not known’. This may also make his chance weaker.
Moreover, Gautam spent almost 30 years, best of his life, serving the UN and doing virtually nothing for Nepal. After retirement from the UN service, he has, now, sought even more plump and prestigious job on Nepal’s quota, which can by no means be justified. There are some qualified diplomats, former ambassadors and ministers who have worked for Nepal throughout their life. They could be better and more justified candidates for the post of the chair of the UN General Assembly.
Given this background, it may be not possible for Gautam to be chosen for the coveted post. Firstly, Gautam‘s background may not be sound to claim the chairperson of the UNGA. As a former medium level employee may not be well received and appreciated by the Asian countries. More than that Nepal’s diplomatic maneuvering is weak compared to its competitor. In recent years, Nepal’s image has been badly tarnished in the international arena because of the political instability at home and diplomatic incompetence abroad. Given the political instability, uncertainty and conflict, Nepal is being dubbed in the international arena as one of the failed states in the world. This is the making of Nepal’s political parties. This is also likely to weaken the position of Nepal in its bid for UNGA chair.
The ongoing row with the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) is yet another case that has dampened the image and credibility of Nepal in the international community. The government and the ruling parties trying to send the UNMIN packing as the UN Mission’s performance did not suit their partisan interest. The UN mission came to Nepal not on its own choice but at the formal invitation of the government of Nepal and political parties to monitor the Constituent Assembly election, peace process and the management of the arms and armies of the Nepal Army and the Maoist combatants. Now only half of the mission has been accomplished. The main job of the management of the arms and armies remains unresolved. The tripartite agreement between the UN, Nepal Government and the UCPN-Maoist has outlined the mandate and jurisdiction of the UNMIN, according to which it has been functioning in Nepal. After completing its mission, the UNMIN would automatically go away. But it depends upon the political parties. If political parties act swiftly and agree on early management of arms and armies of the Maoist combatants, the issue would be resolved early, which would pave the way for UNMIN’s departure from Nepal. But the government and the ruling parties are making a big hue and cry in public against the UNMIN and are demanding UNMIN’s early exit from Nepal. But they have failed to follow the due procedures. If the government and parties, at all, want UNMIN to go away, they must write to the UN Secretary General and the UN Security Council. The UNMIN would go back only when the Security Council calls it back. What the government and the ruling parties are saying and doing is against the accepted norms and rules of international diplomacy, which is yet another example of diplomatic naiveté of Nepal. Moreover, the government is just one constituent of the three parties that signed the tripartite agreement. The rest two parties are the UNMIN itself and the Maoists. Since the Maoists are not in favour of UNMIN’s premature exit, the decision of the government alone would not be binding for the UNMIN. This row with the United Nation regarding its mission in Nepal is likely to cost heavily for Nepal in the election for UNGA chair. If Nepal wants its candidate to be elected, it has to immediately end its row with the UN Mission in Nepal and create a better and more credible image in the United Nations and in the international arena as a whole.
Comments
Post a Comment