CLOSING REMARKS AT AM12 DEFINE THE INNOVATIVE SPIRIT OF ACUNS

SUNRISE SUNSET

ABIODUN WILLIAMS Incoming Chair, ACUNS

Informational Memorandum No. 3 • 2012

ACUNSTHE ACADEMIC COUNCIL ON THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM

1

C O N T I N U E D O N P A G E 2 >

I would like to thank Christer for serving as Chair of ACUNS during the past three years, and for his inspired leadership. It is an honour and privilege for me to become the Chair of ACUNS as the organization begins its next twenty-five years. My links to ACUNS go back twenty-one years when I participated in the first ACUNS/ASIL Summer Workshop, which was held at Dartmouth in 1991. I subsequently served on the Board of Directors and as Vice Chair.

To close a conference whose course is run is advantageous; one has personally participated in the journey, and is fully acquainted with its outcome. So twilight has its rewards no less than dawn, and I am pleased to conclude the dialogue that has taken place over the past two days.

I think it is particularly fitting that ACUNS’s twenty-fifth anniversary commemoration should have taken place in New York, the home of the United Nations, and hosted by the CUNY Graduate Centre. The Ralph Bunche Institute at CUNY hosted an important preparatory meeting in June 1996, at which guide-

lines for the founding of ACUNS were established. The first Annual Meeting was also held at the Bunche Institute in 1988. This is a valued example of continuity.

I do not think we have come up with definitive answers to the interrogative theme of this year’s Annual Meeting, and that was not the essential goal. We have advanced the debate about new norms, new actors, and the future of the United Nations, as well as the new forms of international cooperation that must be developed in the twenty-first century. This successful Annual Meeting would not have been possible without the support of many people. I would like to recognize in particular the six volunteers from Wilfrid Laurier who deferred their participation in their graduation ceremonies in order to assist us at the Annual Meeting. I would also like to make a special mention of Alistair Edgar, our Executive Director, and Brenda Burns of the ACUNS Secretariat, and to thank them for their tremendous efforts. I look forward to working more closely with them over the next three years.

C O N T I N U E D F R O M C O V E R >

2

The founders of ACUNS had three fundamental objectives. First, to create a new organization to stimulate and support research and teaching on the role of the United Nations system and international relations; sec-ond, to strengthen connections among scholars and practitioners, working in the international organization field in different parts of the world; and third, to encourage a new generation in international organization studies in general, and in the United Nations system in particular. During the past twenty-five years, ACUNS has made significant contributions to the fulfillment of all three goals. The teaching and research on the UN today is much better than it was in 1987. The ACUNS journal, Global Governance, launched in 1985, in cooper-ation with the UN University, is a congenial home for articles in the field. The Annual Meetings and Summer Workshops have enhanced cooperation between scholars and practitioners, and helped to encourage a new generation. ACUNS has also evolved into a more international organization. From its early North American origins, and a quarter of a century after its founding, ACUNS has a clearly defined identity.

Innovation is part of the ACUNS tradition, and we must embrace the exciting possibilities of the future. But it is important for the Organization to cherish the valued goals which have guided ACUNS for a generation.

What should be some of the key objectives of ACUNS as the Organization begins its next chapter? First, ACUNS must strengthen its financial base to the greatest possible extent – stable financing is critical. Second, we must expand our membership, both individual and institutional members. Third, we must continue mak-ing ACUNS more international. Fourth, ACUNS must renew its ties with the United Nations system, includ-ing the Bretton Woods institutions. Finally, ACUNS must encourage the next generation of scholars and practitioners. These are some of the priorities I look forward to considering with the Board and the broader membership in the months ahead. Thank you very much.

Abiodun Williams is Senior Vice-President of the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention, USIP

Abiodun Williams

acuns.org

Members Hugh Dugan, United Nations Mary Farrell, University of Greenwich (London, UK) Kirsten Haack, Northumbria University Sukehiro Hasegawa, Hosei University Lise Morjé Howard, Georgetown University Melissa Labonte, Fordham University Jan Wouters, University of Leuven

ACUNS Board Members2 0 1 2 - 2 0 1 3

Chair Abiodun Williams, CenterforConflictAnalysis and Prevention, USIP

Past Chair Christer Jönsson, Lund University

Vice Chair Roger Coate, Georgia College and State University Rama Mani, University of Oxford

ACUNS Secretariat Staff

new contacts

Alistair Edgar, Executive Director

Brenda Burns, Administration, Communications and Program Development

ACUNS Secretariat Wilfrid Laurier University75 University Avenue, West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5

T. 226.772.3142F. 226.772.3004

E. bburns@wlu.ca

SUNRISE SUNSETCLOSING REMARKS AT AM12 DEFINE THE INNOVATIVE SPIRIT OF ACUNS

I N N O VAT I O N I S PA RT O F T H E A C U N S T R A D I T I O N , A N D W E M U S T E M B R A C E T H E E X C I T I N G P O S S I B I L I T I E S O F T H E F U T U R E . B U T I T I S I M P O RTA N T F O R T H E O R G A N I Z AT I O N TO C H E R I S H T H E VA L U E D G O A L S W H I C H H AV E G U I D E D

A C U N S F O R A G E N E R AT I O N .

3

INTRODUCTIONAccording to its mission statement, UNESCO contributes “to the building of peace, the alleviation of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue”, but in these four fields UNESCO has few results to show. The contributions of the World Bank, UNICEF and others to the alleviation of poverty dwarf those of UNESCO and the contribution of UNESCO to the building of peace, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue consists mainly of good intentions.

Although UNESCO made important contributions to oceanography, bio-ethics, statistics, anti-doping, the preserva-tion of natural and cultural heritage and in other fields, it did, so far, not fulfil its self defined mission. The question is why?

Some might argue that the general goals in UNESCO’s mis-sion statement should not be taken too seriously and that for a description of what UNESCO really tries to accomplish one should rather look to its five “overarching objectives”:

• AttainingqualityEducationforAll;

• Mobilizingscientificknowledgeandsciencepolicy for sustainable development;

• Addressingemergingethicalchallenges;

• Promotingculturaldiversityandinterculturaldialogue;

• Buildinginclusiveknowledgesocietiesthrough information and communication.

Unfortunately UNESCO has not reached these objectives either, although it has contributed to each of them.

The thesis of this paper is that UNESCO had no chance to succeed, because, apart from the field of culture, the precondi-tions for success were not fulfilled. A comparison with the way NATO fulfilled these preconditions might help to illustrate this point.

The main reason to create NATO was to guard against the military threat of the Soviet Union. Now that the Soviet Union and theWarsawPact no longer exist, it can be said that NATO has fulfilled that purpose. (The new tasks that NATO took upon itself after the end of the cold war fall outsidethescopeofthisarticle.)Partoftheexplanationforthis success is that some general preconditions for success were fulfilled. These preconditions are a clear goal, a sensible division of labour, availability of the necessary means, close involvement of the Member States and procedures to stimu-late implementation of what has been agreed.

A CLEAR GOALAn essential condition for reaching a goal is to know what the goal is. For NATO the original goal was clear: confronting the Soviet threat by joining political and military forces. The goal of UNESCO is much less clear. It is described in many different ways, such as to construct “the defences of peace” in the minds of men, to advance “the objectives of interna-tional peace and of the common welfare of mankind”, “to contribute to peace and security” and “to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms”. These quotes are all from the Constitution and they are all very recommendable, but they differ and what complicates things even more, they differ from what UNESCO is considered to be in practice: the specialized organisation of the United Nations in the fields of Education, Science, Culture and Communication.

As a result UNESCO’s official mission statement is over-loaded: "UNESCO contributes to the building of peace, the alleviation of poverty, sustainable development and inter-cultural dialogue through education, the sciences, culture, communication and information". This sounds nice, but it is impossibly wide. By pointing in almost all directions at the same time, UNESCO is in reality going nowhere.

Compare this mission statement with the mission state-ments of other specialized organisations of the United Nations. Those can be summarized in a few words, like “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health” for the World Health Organisation and “achieving food security for all” for the Food and Agricultural Organisation. The WHO and FAO have their own problems, but at least it is clear what their main priority is.

SUMMARYUNESCO will not reach its goals unless its Member States accept their responsibility. This means that the organisation has to be turned upside down: from an organisation where the Secretariat tries to fulfil these goals with support from the Member States, into an organisation where the Member States fulfil these goals with support from the Secretariat.

CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSNATO as an example for UNESCO

C O N T I N U E D O N P A G E 6 >

Barend ter Haar

A CLEAR GOALA SENSIBLE DIVISION OF LABOURavalilability of necessary means

CLOSE INVOLVEMENT OF THE MEMBER STATESprocedures to encourage member states to fulfil their obligations

NEW NORMS, NEW ACTORS, A NEW UNITED NATIONS? The 25th anniversary, 2012 Annual Meeting now is part of our organiza-tional and substantive history.

Elsewhere in this newsletter, ACUNS mem-bers will find the text of the closing address by our new ACUNS Chair Dr. Abiodun Williams, and also that of Ambassador Barend ter Haar’s comparative look at UNESCO and NATO – thanks to both, for giving us permission to use these pieces here. Videos of the main speeches and plenary session discussions are being loaded to the new ACUNS web site, so that their content can be reviewed by those members and others who were there, and seen for the first time by those who were unable to attend and participate.

We were indebted especially to Robert C. Orr, Assistant Secretary-General for Strategic Planning and Policy Coordination, for taking the time to come to The Graduate Centre CUNY to deliver the Opening Keynote, speaking to a full-house audience about “A new business model for the United Nations” before flying out almost immediately afterwards to attend the Rio +20 meeting. Speaking about his own expectations for the meeting in Rio, Dr. Orr noted that “easy agreement on big principles is not where we are at”, and suggested instead that it would be “what we’re actually delivering on the ground in sustainable development which will make this conference successful or not”.

However, it was not Rio per se that was the focus of his address to the ACUNS meeting in New York. Rather, he set out the framework of what he described to us as a “new business

model” for the UN – adopting a problem-centric rather than mandate-centric approach, using the Secretary-General’s convening power to build new multi-stakeholder allianc-es, engaging global leaders on the key policy issues, and using the Secretary-General’s good offices to mediate between the very differ-ent interests of stakeholders on these global issues. Dr. Orr then focused on how that new model has emerged and been utilized to advance the global public goods agenda in three important areas of global governance – climate change (sustainable energy), global public health, and counter-terrorism. His reference to lessons learned from China offered an interesting insight into the breadth of perspective being drawn upon. At the end, his enthusiasm for his work was clear: “I will tell you, it’s not just energizing for people out there, but within the UN walls we’re doing things with players at levels that we have really never done before, and that is exciting when you face the daunting challenges the UN does today”. For more of Dr. Orr’s Opening Keynote, visit the ACUNS web site.

The major components of the AM12 already were highlighted in earlier Newsletter and E-Update materials preceding the event. Thus, I will not repeat here the list of excel-lent speakers who gave us their time and knowledge but I do extend ACUNS’ grati-tude to all of them for taking important roles in our program. However, and for reasons that will be obvious, I do now want to high-light one last-minute change to the program as we were very grateful to Ambassador Anne Anderson, Permanent Representative for Ireland to the United Nations, who stepped in to replace a Plenary Session speaker who

N o t e s f r o m t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r

STAYI NG on topic:

A NEW BUSINESS MODEL FOR CHANGE

Alistair Edgar, Executive Director, ACUNS

4

MOVING INTO THE NEXT QUARTER CENTURY AT ACUNS A NEW OFFICE LOCATION, AND A STRONG COMMITMENT FROM OUR SECRETARIAT HOST

Renew your membership or become a member online at www.acuns.orgThe university administration was immensely supportive of a bid for renewal as host

and accepted my "ACUNS wish list" – at the early stages of our own internal discussions.

4

City University of New York (CUNY), host of the recent AM12.

5

A NEW BUSINESS MODEL FOR CHANGE

suffered an accidental injury the day before. Ambassador Anderson drew on her wealth of prior experience including serving as Ireland’s PR to the UN in Geneva, as Ambassador to France and to Monaco, and as PR to the European Union in Brussels, and treated us to a highly entertaining, insightful and ener-getic look at the role of ambassadors as indi-vidual actors in global governance. Thanks to Ambassador Anderson and her staff, as well as to our own Melissa Labonte for making the initial connection on our behalf.

The ACUNS Secretariat: stability, renewal and new opportunities

As announced by Charlotte Ku, the chair of the Secretariat Search Committee, at the opening reception of the 2012 Annual Meeting, the ACUNS Secretariat will contin-ue to be hosted by Wilfrid Laurier University for the 2013-18 cycle. This was, I should stress, an open competition and there were a number of interested potential hosts. From my own side, the university administration was immensely supportive of a bid for renewal as host, and accepted my “ACUNS wish list” – at the early stages of our own internal discussions, I suggested that any such renewal bid needed to be more and better than what had won the first and the second terms here. That wish list included an additional, full time staff member to begin in July 2013 and a graduate student intern, as well as financial support for the full 5 years to replace the basic operating funding generously provided from CIGI, which ends this year. I have to say, that I am very excited not just narrowly for myself (although that too), but also for ACUNS, as the new staff will allow Brenda and myself to

do a lot more “value-added” work, for example in developing new programs and with the web site, even while expanding the range and speed of our daily services for members. Brenda may edit this out – she actually cried when she learned that we had won the renewal bid!

In addition, ACUNS now has moved from our lovely old yellow brick house, which we enjoyed for many reasons except for the absence of A/C, into the recently opened Balsillie School of International Affairs. At the BSIA we will be able to connect with the many visiting fellows, guest speakers, numerous colleagues (including Tad Homer-Dixon, David Welch, Robert Cox, and soon James Orbinski), and of course the high-tech recording facilities that Brenda cannot wait to use for planning webinars, other broadcast interviews and workshops etc. Our telephone numbers are going to change, although our email addresses will remain the same.

Last but not least: you all will know that Abiodun Williams now has taken on the role of ACUNS Chair, as Christer Jönsson completed his three-year term. Christer will remain on the Board as Past Chair for another two years, which gives us the great strength of institutional memory in our top leadership roles. I have enjoyed immensely the opportunity to work with, and for, Christer since I returned to ACUNS two years ago. He has given me consistently wise and constructive advice, as well as becoming a great friend. Now, Abi will have to put up with my constant barrage of questions, ideas and requests!

The university administration was immensely supportive of a bid for renewal as host

and accepted my "ACUNS wish list" – at the early stages of our own internal discussions.

ACUNS now has moved from our lovely old yellow brick house, which we

enjoyed for many reasons except for the absence of A/C, into the recently

opened Balsillie School of International Affairs (artist's depiction above).

At the BSIA we will be able to connect with the

many visiting fellows, guest speakers, numerous colleagues, and of course

the high-tech recording facilities for webinars,

other broadcast interviews and workshops etc.

WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY

AM13

a c u n s . o r g

2013 ACUNS ANNUAL MEETING

LUND, SWEDENLund University

1 7 - 1 9 J U N E , 2 0 1 3

AM142014 ACUNS ANNUAL MEETING

ISTANBUL, TURKEYKadir Has University

1 8 - 2 0 J U N E , 2 0 1 4

46

The lack of focus in the constitution and in its mission statement is reflected in UNESCO’s work plan. This includes two global priorities (Africa and gender equality), five OverarchingObjectives and fourteen Strategic ProgrammeObjectives and comes close to listing all the world’s prob-lems. It is no wonder that UNESCO by spreading its small resources over so many objectives and target groups usually accomplishes very little.

A SENSIBLE DIVISION OF LABOURAn other precondition for reaching a goal is a division of labour that is based on the capabilities of the different actors. Because it was clear that only NATO’s Member States them-selves would be able to develop and maintain the capabil-ity to resist an armed attack, the NATO Charter gives this responsibility explicitly to them: the Parties will maintain and develop their capacity to resist armed attack, they will consult togetherwheneverthesecurityofanyofthePartiesisthreat-ened and they agree that an armed attack against one shall be considered an attack against them all. The Secretary General of NATO and the international staff play an important role by preparing, promoting and facilitating cooperation between the allies, but they cannot take over these responsibilities.

UNESCO´s Constitution lacks clarity about the dis-tribution of responsibilities. Article 1 speaks about “the Organization”. But who or what is “the Organization”? The Constitution does not answer that question. Logic would require that Member States accept the main responsibility to fulfil the purposes of UNESCO, because the chances that the Secretariat on its own would be able to attain objectives like quality Education for All are comparable with the chanc-es that the International Staff of NATO would have been abletofighttheWarsawPactonitsown.Itisthereforeveryremarkable, if not weird, that UNESCO’s strategy and work plan seem to give the full responsibility to reach UNESCO’s objectives to the Secretariat.

AVAILABILITY OF THE NECESSARY MEANSAnother necessary condition for reaching a goal is to make the necessary means available. The division of this burden has always been a point of discussion among the Member States of NATO, but they never denied their responsibility to make the necessary means available.

In UNESCO the setting of goals and the provision of the means to reach those goals are often dealt with as com-pletely separate issues. It is not unusual that Member States agree with a lofty goal without seriously considering the pro-vision of the necessary means to reach that goal. Such an inconsequential way of governing the organisation would be unthinkable within NATO.

It should be noted here that the UNESCO Secretariat is smaller than one might expect from an organization with such a broad mandate. It has about 2000 staff members and a regular budget for 2010 and 2011 of US $653 million. That is about the same as the income of Greenpeace1. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), an organiza-tion with a much smaller mandate than UNESCO, has 2300 staff members and had a regular budget for the same two years of about $870 million.

Because of the recent decision of the United States to stop paying its dues, the available budget will be even smaller than it was. However, even when the regular budget would be dou-bled or quadrupled, it would be impossible for the Secretariat to take over the responsibilities of Member States to make good education available to all, etc.

CLOSE INVOLVEMENT OF THE MEMBER STATESWhen countries attach high priority to an objective, they should remain closely involved. That is why the Atlantic Council, NATO’s highest organ, meets at least once a week at thelevelofPermanentRepresentatives,atthelevelofminis-ters at least once a year and at the level of Heads of State and Government as often as needed. To prepare these meetings and to promote practical cooperation a large number of com-mittees was set up, that also meet as frequently as needed.

C O N T I N U E D F R O M PA G E 3 >

1 Income in 2010 was €230 million, that is about $302 million. Multiplied by 2 makes $604 million.

NATO

Art 3 the Parties, (..), will maintain and develop their (..) capacity to resist armed attack.

Art 4 The Parties will consult together (..).

Art 5 The Parties agree that an armed attack against one (..) shall be considered an attack against them all (..)

UNESCO

Art 1.1. The purpose of the Organization is to contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among the nations through education, science and culture in order to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms (..).

PRIORITIES mentioned in the introduction to the Work Plan for 2012 & 2013

• gender equality• science, technology and innovation; • protecting biodiversity; • culture and development; • freedom of media and press; • internet; • building a culture of peace • taking new paths towards peace• education for all • inclusive knowledge societies • encourage cultural diversity• sustainable development, • climate change • HIV/AIDS;• human rights• South-South cooperation

TARGET GROUPS mentioned in the introduction to the Work Plan for 2012 & 2013

• Africa • Small Island Developing States • least developed countries • middle-income countries;• youth• poorest segments of society,• indigenous peoples • post-conflict and post-disaster situations

7

NATO

Most Member States have a Permanent Representative

Council meets at least once a week

Committees such as the Political Committee meet very frequently

UNESCO

Most Member States have a Permanent Representative

General Conference meets once every 2 years

Executive Board meets twice a year

This close involvement of the Member States of NATO con-trasts sharply with the detached attitude of UNESCO Member States. Although most of them have a permanent representa-tion to UNESCO, they seldom meet for a formal discussion of UNESCO affairs. Most of them are formally involved only once every two years during the General Conference.Whereas thePermanentRepresentativestoNATOhaveatleastonceaweek an official meeting, even the 58 members of UNESCO’s Executive Board meet only twice a year.

What makes things even worse is that UNESCO’s General Conference and Executive Board spend most of their time on issues of secondary importance, like the budget and the organisation of the Secretariat, or on issues that fall in essence outsideUNESCO´smandate,suchasthestatusofPalestine.Issues that are crucial for fulfilling UNESCO´s mandate, such as the state of education in the world, are seldom discussed in a result oriented manner at these meetings. Some of these issues are discussed at UNESCO World Conferences on spe-cific subjects, such as the World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development that took place in Bonn in 2009. However, these conferences lack a proper follow up.

PROCEDURES TO ENCOURAGE MEMBER STATES TO FULFILL THEIR OBLIGATIONSThe credibility of NATO’s collective defence depends on the provision by individual allies of the necessary capabilities. A DefencePlanningProcesswasthereforesetupthatincludeda regular review of the contributions of individual Member States to the common goals. The Member States retained their full sovereign rights, but the process generated peer pres-sure to fulfil their commitments.

Like NATO, UNESCO is confronted with the problem that it has few formal instruments to force Member States tohonourtheircommitments.Peerpressureand“nameandshame” can be quite effective, but within UNESCO little use is made of these possibilities. Apart from the cultural conven-tions, the only exception is the confidential procedure of the Committee on Conventions and Recommendations (CR) that can deal with individual complains about non-compli-ance by Member States. But usually Member States easily get away with not doing what they agreed to do.

CULTURE AS THE EXCEPTION UNESCO is often described as the cultural organisation of the United Nations, ignoring its role in the fields of educa-tion, science and communication. This error is regrettable but understandable, because only in the field of culture does UNESCO play a leading role. The reason is that this role is based on a number of treaties, such as the Convention for theProtectionofCultural Property in theEvent ofArmedConflict(1954),theConventionontheMeansofProhibitingand Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer ofOwnership of Cultural Property (1970) and the WorldHeritage Convention (1972).

These conventions provide a clear goal and a sensible divi-sion of labour. The responsibility to implement these trea-tieslieswiththeStateParties,whiletheSecretariatplaysanimportant but mainly facilitating role.When a State Partyis not able or willing to protect a World Heritage Site, the World Heritage Committee (WHC) can place the endangered site on the Danger List and, if necessary, remove it from the World Heritage List. This is what happened to the German city of Dresden when, against the strong advice of the WHC, a bridge was build that damaged the Outstanding Universal Value of the site.

WHAT NOW? UNESCO was built upon good intentions, but without the necessary preconditions for success. These preconditions would not have been sufficient, but without them success became unattainable. The result is that UNESCO special-izes in reproducing good intentions rather than in produc-ing concrete results. World wide cooperation in the fields of education, science, culture and communication is of such importance for addressing major world problems, that a more effective organisation is needed.

This will require fundamental reform. UNESCO should be turned around into an organisation:

• withambitious, but clear and realistic goals,

• whereMemberstatesaccepttheirresponsibilityfor fulfilling these goals,

• wherecooperationbetweenMemberStatesistherefore the heart of the organisation,

• whereMemberstatesstimulateeachotherto implement agreements,

• thatprovidestheSecretariatwiththenecessarymeans to fulfill its tasks.

Barend ter Haar, Dutch diplomat seconded to the Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. Earlier in his career he served in the delegation of the Netherlands to NATO and as ambassador to UNESCO. This paper reflects only his personal opinion.

8

Hunger in the Balance: The New Politics of International Food AidJennifer ClappPublished by: Cornell University Press, 2012 ISBN: 978-0801450396

Food aid has become a contentious issue in recent decades, with sharp disagreements over genetically modified crops, agricultural subsidies, and ways of guaranteeing food security in the face of successive global food crises. In Hunger in the Balance, Jennifer Clapp provides a timely and comprehensive account of the contemporary politics of food aid, explaining the origins and outcomes of recent clashes between donor nations—and between donors and recipients.

Peacebuilding and Local Ownership: Post-conflict consensus-buildingTimothy DonaisPublished by: Routledge, 2012 ISBN: 978-0415588744

This book explores the meaning of local ownership in peacebuilding and examines the ways in which it has been, and could be, operationalized in post-conflict environments. In the context of post-conflict peacebuilding, the idea of local ownership is based upon the premise that no peace process is sustainable in the absence of a meaningful degree of local involvement. Despite growing recognition of the importance of local ownership, however, relatively little attention has been paid to specifying what precisely the concept means or how it might be implemented.This volume contributes to the ongoing debate on the future of liberal peacebuilding through a critical investigation of the notion of local ownership, and challenges conventional assumptions about who the relevant locals are and what they are expected to own. Drawing on case studies from Bosnia, Afghanistan and Haiti, the text argues that local ownership can only be fostered through a long-term consensus-building pro-cess, which involves all levels of the conflict-affected society.

Financial Crimes: A Threat to Global SecurityMaximillian Edelbacher, Peter Kratcoski and Michael TheilPublished by: CRC Press, 2012 ISBN: 978-1439869222

Financial market reform has focused chiefly on the threats to stability arising from the risky, uncontrolled activity of the leaders of financial institutions. Nevertheless, organized crime, white-collar crime, and corruption have a huge impact on financial systems worldwide and must also be confronted if true reform is to be achieved. A collection of articles written

by experts in their fields of study, Financial Crimes: A Threat to Global Security spotlights the importance of addressing the problem of illegal financial activity as part of a greater comprehensive plan for reforming the financial sector.Drawn from the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS) held in Vienna, the book explores the major themes discussed at this elite symposium. In the first section, the contributors examine changing concepts in security over the course of history and across nations. They discuss how an event in Austria led to the implementation of a new security philosophy that is now followed by the majority of the European Union. The book examines the diverse models of preventing security threats that have grown from that idea as well as the gradual expansion of the role of the security council of the United Nations.The next section analyzes the present state of security worldwide and examines the wide array of criminal activity that plagues the financial sector. Expert contributors reveal methods to identify certain types of behavior and criminals as well as efforts to combat illegal activity—including the role of the media. The final section investigates alternative approaches to preventing another worldwide financial disaster through investigative reporting, human factors analysis, legislative initiatives, and other methods.Filled with insight from international experts, the book highlights both the warning signs to illegal activity as well as the most effective methods for combating the invidious corruption that, if unchecked, puts all nations at risk.

The End of the Development-Security Nexus? The Rise of Global Disaster ManagementHenning MelberPublished by: The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, 2012 ISBN: 978-9185214662

Thinking and policy on ‘development’ and ‘security’ have undergone paradigmatic shifts in recent decades. The well-known merger of development and security into a ‘develop-ment-security nexus’ is now shifting towards an increasingly institutionalized securitization. Security is everywhere, and development is security. A new discourse and practice is arising as the meaning of these concepts shift and the refer-ents and objects of development and security are changing. Gradually we are moving beyond the development-security nexus into the reign of continuous global disaster management. These new articulations of the development-security nexus and global disaster management have served to legitimize a more radical interventionist agenda – first and foremost carried out by the West in the Global South. With thought-provoking contributions by leading authorities in this burgeoning field, this volume makes sense of the aforementioned paradigmatic shift. The articles explore the rationale and forces behind the institutionalization of interventionism and intrusive disaster management as well as the consequences thereof in a number of policy domains and cases.

A C A D E M I C C O U N C I L O N T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S S Y S T E M

R e c e n t M e m b e r P u b l i c a t i o n s

9

The United Nations and the RegionsPhilippe Lombaerde, Francis Baert and Tânia Felício (Eds.)Published by: Springer ISBN: 978-9400727502

This unique book investigates the implications of the rising importance of supra-national regional organizations for global governance in general, and for the United Nations, in particular. It touches upon issues such as regional representation at the UN, high-level dialogues with regional organizations, as well as the coordination of UN member states’ voting behaviour in the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council. The book further explores the regional dimension and coordination of UN operations in areas such as peace and security, human rights, and sustainable development. The contributions to the book are both in-depth chapters and shorter viewpoints, written by a combination of academics, policy-makers at regional organizations, and experts from international think tanks. The book is essential reading for anyone interested in the future of global governance.

No future without justice – Report of the Civil Society Reflection Group on Global Development PerspectivesHenning MelberPublished by: The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, 2012 ISBN: 978-9185214679

The world faces an unprecedented coincidence of global crises. They testify to the failure of the dominant model of development and economic progress that is oriented on a technocratic modernization path, is blind to human rights and the ecological limits of the global ecosystem, confuses growth of Gross Domestic Product with progress in society, and regards poverty as a primarily technical challenge in which categories of inequality and social justice are neglected.

The Civil Society Reflection Group on Global Development Perspectives brought together 18 civil society activists and scholars from different disciplines from around the globe. Its members jointly drew lessons from the current crises, looked beyond conventional development concepts and goals, questioned the models and measures of development and social progress, and presented alternatives.

This report is the main outcome of the joint deliberations. It describes the root causes of the multiple crises, reconfirms the framework of universal principles and rights, reconsiders development goals and indicators, and draws conclusions for the post-2015 development agenda. It seeks to stimulate debates about alternative development paths, participatory and inclusive governance structures, and the transformation in politics and societies that future justice for all will require.

International Law, International Relations and Global GovernanceCharlotte KuPublished by: Routledge, 2012 ISBN: 978-0415778732

International Relations and International Law have developed in parallel but distinctly throughout the 20th Century. However in recent years there has been recognition that their shared concerns in areas as diverse as the environment, transnational crime and terrorism, human rights and conflict resolution outweigh their disciplinary and methodological divergences. This concise and accessible volume focuses on collaborative work within the disciplines of international law and international relations, and highlights the need to develop this collaboration further, describing the value for individuals, states, IGOs, and other non-state actors in being able to draw on the cross-pollination of international relations and international legal scholarship.

Annual Review of United Nations Affairs (ARUNA) for 2010/2011Joachim Müller and Karl Sauvant (Eds.)Published by: Oxford University Press, 2012 ISBN: 978-0199936687

With the publication of the 2010/2011 edition and going forward, the ARUNA series will be enhanced by the inclusion of six new introductory articles written by expert contributors: Alexander K. A. Greenawalt (Associate Professor of Law, Pace University School of Law), Khalil A. Hamdani (Ph.D., former Director of the Division on Investment, Technology and Enterprise Development of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Hannelore Hoppe (Director and Deputy to the High Representative in the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs), and John R. Mathiason (Professor of International Relations, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University). Readers will find that the detailed commentary of the new introductory articles will offer invaluable guidance on the year's developments in the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the International Court of Justice and Tribunals, the Secretariat, and the Peacekeeping and Peace-building Missions. The 2010/2011 edition also proudly features a Foreword by former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. The Need for Immediate Responses and Strategic Thinking highlights the developing role of the UN as it faces new challenges relating to state sovereignty, democratization, and human rights, many of which have moved to the forefront during the “Arab Spring.”

TAKING STOCK OF POST-CONFLICT PEACEBUILDING

10

Two decades on, the need for effective, sustainable and compre-hensive peacebuilding remains as great as ever, and important steps have been taken to institutionalize peacebuilding as a coherent field of endeavor (most notably through the creation of the UN Peacebuilding Commission). Despite this, however, it remains far from clear how much more effective the UN and the broader international community are at helping to consolidate peace and advance well-being in fragile and war-torn states in 2012 than they were in 1992. The practice of peacebuilding, rather than improving steadily and incrementally through the progressive internalization of lessons learned, has witnessed a gradual erosion of the original liberal consensus that once sustained it, to the extent that the liberal peacebuilding project is now regularly characterized as being ‘in crisis’.

Indeed, perhaps the single most important lesson to be learned from recent peacebuilding praxis relates to the inherent limitations of an externally-driven, social-engineering approach to peacebuilding, one which views the challenges of peacebuilding in terms of the progressive transfer of liberal-democratic norms and institutions into post-conflict spaces. To be sure, few today would challenge the desir-ability of either human rights, the rule of law, or democracy as legiti-mate goals in any society, post-conflict or otherwise, even if the free market prescriptions of the liberal model remain fiercely contested. In practice, however, the technocratic, sometimes coercive means employed in pursuit of these goals in post-conflict environments has often meant treating the domestic context – in both its political and cultural manifestations – as part of the problem rather than as part of the solution. As a result, international actors have regularly attempted to circumvent domestic political processes and have failed to appreci-

ate the enduring relevance of local culture and tradition. In short, outsiders have been guilty, in the words of one practitioner, of “the dual sin of ignorance and arrogance,”1 leading to peacebuilding outcomes that are typically more virtual than substantive, and in which externally-promoted norms and institutions are thinly-rooted and have minimal impact on domestic governance practices.2

The ongoing crisis of liberal peacebuilding has led, more or less directly, to the ‘rediscovery’ of the local in peacebuilding contexts, and both policy and scholarly debates are increasingly dominated by efforts to re-conceptualize the relationship between international and domestic actors in post-conflict environments. The concept of national, or local, ownership has for example come to be accepted as part of the contemporary commonsense of peacebuilding; national ownership is “an imperative, an absolute essential, if peacebuilding is to take root,” according to one recent UN report.3 This is so even if it remains unclear precisely which ‘local owners’ matter, or whether ownership means ‘them’ taking ownership of ‘our’ ideas or the outside facilitation of national/local solutions to national/local problems.4 The notion of hybridity has also become fashionable in peacebuild-ing contexts, as observers increasingly recognize that the encounter of ideas, agendas, and institutional forms across the international/domestic divide almost inevitably generates unique, context-specific outcomes;5 whether it is possible to steer such processes towards more peaceful outcomes, however, remains open to debate. Finally, recent work by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee has attempted to re-orient state-building from a concept associated with technical, bureaucratic institution-building to one emphasizing the need to strengthen state-society relationships.6

Inherent limitations on an externally-driven, social engineering appproach to peacebuilding

Timothy Donais

1 Cited in Béatrice Pouligny, “Supporting Local Ownership in Humanitarian Action,” Humanitarian Policy Paper Series, Center for Transatlantic Relations and Global Public Policy Institute, 2009; available online: www.gppi.net/fileadmin/gppi/GPPiPPR_local_ownership_2009.pdf2 Oliver Richmond and Jason Franks, “Liberal Hubris? Virtual Peace in Cambodia,” Security Dialogue 38, 1 (2007): 27-48.3 United Nations, “Review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture,” A/64/868-S/2010/393, 21 July 2010.

4 Astri Suhrke, cited in Volker Boege et al, “On Hybrid Political Orders and Emerging States: State Formation in the Context of ‘Fragility’,” Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management, 2008. Available online at: www.berghof-handbook.net/documents/publications/boege_etal_handbook.pdf.5 Roger Mac Ginty, International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace. London/New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011.6 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Supporting Statebuilding in Situations of Conflict and Fragility. Paris: OECD, 2011; available online at: http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/4311031e.pdf

Twenty years ago last month, then-UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali

helped define the terms, and the agenda, of contemporary peacebuilding with

the publication of An Agenda for Peace. Amid the UN’s own struggles to keep the peace

in conflict zones as diverse as Somalia, Bosnia, and Cambodia, Boutros-Ghali’s

expansive definition of peacebuilding – “comprehensive efforts to identify and

support structures which will tend to consolidate peace and advance a sense of

confidence and well-being among people” – signaled a growing recognition of the

limits of traditional peacekeeping and helped set the stage for multidimensional

peacebuilding to emerge as a core priority of the UN system.

Few today would challenge the desirability of either human rights, the rule of law, or democracy as legitimate goals in any society, post-conflict or otherwise, even if the free market prescriptions

of the liberal model remain fiercely contested.

All of this points towards the emergence of a richer, more nuanced debate on the appropriate roles of outsiders in shepherding societies from conflict to peace; the broader peacebuilding community is asking better questions – around norms, legitimacy, and agency – even if definitive answers to such questions have yet to emerge. On the policy side, the ongoing International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding, itself facilitated by the emergence of the g7+ as the collective voice of conflict-affected states, has also provided a viable framework for a constructive dialogue among donors and recipients on both the means and ends of peacebuilding. Ultimately, while

there has been considerable emphasis in recent years on ensuring better integration and coordination among the plethora of bilateral and multilateral actors involved in peacebuilding efforts, it is also increasingly clear that genuinely ‘integrated’ peacebuilding must not only include international actors but also the governments and the citizens of conflict-affected states.

TAKING STOCK OF POST-CONFLICT PEACEBUILDING

Benefits for members:

• subscription and electronic access to the quarterly journal,

Global Governance and ACUNS’ quarterly newsletter

• access to official UN system meetings and library collections

thanks to our Category 1 consultative status with ECOSOC

• access to our global network through our liaison offices

in Delhi, Geneva, New York, and Vienna

• opportunities to participate in ACUNS events that address

pressing global issues by putting researchers in conversation

with practitioners

PLUS Institutional Members can designate up to

four representatives who will each receive the

same benefits plus the opportunity to profile

new programs or projects on the ACUNS website.

Maria AkchurinAndry AndriantsehenoFurqan AsifChristiana BadooTony BonniciAndrea Fernanda Rodrigues BrittoCaridad CanalesThi Thuy Van DinhAygul DuysenhanovaRyan D'SouzaSara EdgeBarend ter HaarFelicity HeffernanGisela Hirschmann

Casey KarrAngelika KöpfThomas KruessmannJacqueline KuanAnna HalpineMasashi HigashitaniMarjorie HindsFiona MackayKarim MakdisiErin McCandlessTomiji MizutaniLindiwe Mndebele Holger NiemannMatthew PerkinsYu Rong

Robert ScanlonDeborah ScheinMelinda Ching SimonNishkala SuntharalingamCorinne TagliarinaKanokkarn TevapitakMelissa TorresEduardo UzielHarry VerhoevenNaomi WeinbergerChiayun YehMaria ZabolotskayaMarie-Joelle ZaharTina ZapilePeter Zuckerman

New Individual Members

Renew your membership or become a member online at

acuns.org

Kadir Has UniversityNew Institutional Members

Timothy Donais is an Associate Professor at Wilfrid Laurier University

Twenty years ago last month, then-UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali

helped define the terms, and the agenda, of contemporary peacebuilding with

the publication of An Agenda for Peace. Amid the UN’s own struggles to keep the peace

in conflict zones as diverse as Somalia, Bosnia, and Cambodia, Boutros-Ghali’s

expansive definition of peacebuilding – “comprehensive efforts to identify and

support structures which will tend to consolidate peace and advance a sense of

confidence and well-being among people” – signaled a growing recognition of the

limits of traditional peacekeeping and helped set the stage for multidimensional

peacebuilding to emerge as a core priority of the UN system.

In practice, however, the technocratic, sometimes coercive means employed in pursuit of these goals in post-conflict environments has often meant treating the domestic context – in both its political and cultural manifestations – as part of the problem rather than as part of the solution.

Few today would challenge the desirability of either human rights, the rule of law, or democracy as legitimate goals in any society, post-conflict or otherwise, even if the free market prescriptions

of the liberal model remain fiercely contested.

12

MIS

C-03

41-Ju

ly12

ACU

NS N

ewsle

tter #

3/20

12

MEMBERSHIP FORM

Member Information

Prefix: o Dr. o Mr. o Ms. o Mrs. o Miss

FirstName:

LastName:

Address:

Country: Telephone:

Fax: Email:

o Yes, I would like to receive the ACUNS newsletter electronically

What best describesyourareaofareaofexpertise?(optional):

Membership Type

o Renewal o New Member o Institutional Member

Payment Options

o Check enclosed o Money order enclosed

o Mastercard o Visa

CardNumber:____________/____________/____________/___________

ExpirationDate:______/______

Signature:

Fee SchedulePlease note that membership fees are in US funds.

Institutional Membership (US $) Annual Fee $360.00 oIndividual Membership (US $) Annual FeeExtendedTerm(fiveyear) $425.00 oSponsoring $155.00 oOver$40,000income $95.00 oUpto$40,000income $70.00 oRetiredPerson/Student $50.00 o

RETURN PAYMENT TO:

ACUNS Secretariat Wilfrid Laurier University 75 University Avenue West Waterloo, ON • N2L 3C5 CANADA

OR Fax: 226.772.3004

Cheques must be made payable to WLU-ACUNS. IPOs must be payable at Canadian banks.

For more information, please contact: 226.772.3142 or visit acuns.org

An ACUNS annual membership is based on four quarters to coincide with four issues of the journal, Global Governance, which you receive with your membership.

THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL ON THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM

Please send your donation to:

FRIENDS OF ACUNS, c/o Jean Krasno, Yale University 31 Hillhouse Avenue New Haven, CT 06511

Friends of ACUNS is incorporated under New York State and federal law as a not-for-profit public charity with 501(c) (3) status.

Interested in helping? Value our work?

Help to secure ACUNS’ future. Support the Friends of ACUNS endowment. Your gift will help to ensure the financial future of ACUNS and the continuation of its programs. Contributions are tax-deductible.

WHY NOT CONSIDER donating your book royalties to the Friends of ACUNS?

Renew your membership or become a member online at

acuns.org