January 28, 2006

HE'D BE EVEN BETTER THAN CLINTON:

Americans Want Blair to Replace Annan (Angus Reid Global Scan, 1/28/06)

Many adults in the United States believe the current prime minister of Britain would be a perfect fit for the United Nations (UN), according to a poll by Gallup released by CNN and USA Today. 66 per cent of respondents would favour Tony Blair becoming the next UN secretary-general.

Of course, Kofi is practically W's rent boy at this point, but Mr. Blair would be more reliably liberty-minded.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 28, 2006 6:19 PM
Comments

Sounds like a plan.

Posted by: erp at January 28, 2006 6:30 PM

Learned a new word, did we?

Posted by: Lou Gots at January 28, 2006 7:20 PM

Let's get this going!

Posted by: Genecis at January 28, 2006 7:55 PM

If Kofi is W's 'rent boy' at this point, just why exactly did he rush off to Teheran to ensure our coordinated pressure on Iran was deflected?

Color me unconvinced - deeply.

Posted by: too true at January 28, 2006 8:21 PM

maybe W wants the iranians to make his day.

Posted by: toe at January 28, 2006 10:26 PM

I don't think he can, I thought the next head was from Asia?

There's rules about these things.

Posted by: Sandy P at January 29, 2006 1:34 AM

Why not just promote Bolton?

Posted by: Kirk Parker at January 29, 2006 2:29 AM

So all that effort to write the US Constitution, the Federalist Papers and all, was a waste of time? All that really mattered was one person?

Look, the UN is *designed* to be corrupt. Redesign it first, with as much effort as it takes to do any constitution (and then some; this is bigger), then get back to me.

Posted by: ras at January 29, 2006 5:47 AM

There's going to be a UN--do you really want an effective, democratic one or one that we control?

Posted by: oj at January 29, 2006 7:47 AM

Mr. Judd;

Those are effectively the same thing.

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at January 29, 2006 12:33 PM


Selecting the UN Secretary-General

The Secretary-General is appointed to a five year term by the General Assembly, on recommendation from the Security Council. The candidate must receive at least nine votes - including those of all five permanent members - in the Security Council. [...] Advance discussion and political compromises generally ensure the recommendation of a single candidate, usually from middle powers and with little prior fame, who is appointed by acclamation. While high profile candidates are frequently touted for the job, these are almost always rejected as unpalatable to some governments. [...]

Although there is technically no limit to the number of five-year terms a Secretary-General may serve, UN Secretaries-General normally spend two terms in office and, by convention, are chosen on a rotational basis among the world’s geographic regions. [...] While the rotational practice would now strongly encourage an Asian be selected in 2007, there are rumblings that Eastern Europe (technically a UN regional group) have not fielded a SG in the UN's 60 year history. [...] (While it is also true that no Secretary General has originated from North America or Oceania, these geographic regions fall respectively into the Western European and Other [WEOG] and Asian UN geopolitical groups.) [Ha!! North America is "Other", and Europe gets named, and receives top billing. Talk about putting the cart before the horse... M.H.]

A few informal rules also govern the selection process. The most known is that a national of a permanent member - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom or the United States - is not allowed to stand for the post, as it would center too much power in one government, depsite the [purported] independence of the SG position. [...]

Posted by: Michael Herdegen [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 29, 2006 3:07 PM

Yes, they've already said they'd waive it for Clinton too.

Posted by: oj at January 29, 2006 3:48 PM
« FUNNY HOW THAT WORKS: | Main | ROOM TO THE RIGHT: »